ML18206A555
ML18206A555 | |
Person / Time | |
---|---|
Site: | Consolidated Interim Storage Facility |
Issue date: | 07/19/2018 |
From: | Consolidated Interim Storage Facility |
To: | Division of Spent Fuel Management |
Shared Package | |
ML18206A595 | List:
|
References | |
E-52247 | |
Download: ML18206A555 (79) | |
Text
WCS Consolidated Interim Storage Facility Safety Analysis Report Revision 2 Page B-1 Attachment B Flood Plain Report (1014 pages)
C ** CDDK*JDVCE INC.
I I ENGINEERING AND CONSULTING 812 WEST ELEVENTH 512-474-9097
TEXAS Rl!Gl9Tl!IU!D EllGINE!RINO FIRM F.aA CENTRALIZED INTERIM STORAGE FACILITY DRAINAGE EVALUATION AND FLOODPLAIN ANALYSIS MARCH 2016 REVISED NOVEMBER 2016 REVISED DECEMBER 2016 Prepared for:
Waste Control Specialists LLC P.O. Box 1129 Andrews, Texas 78714 Prepared by:
Cook-Joyce, Inc.
812West11 1h Street, Suite 205 Austin, Texas 78701 This report is issued for permitting or licensing purposes. It is not intended for bidding or construction pu.rp~es.~
<i)~
~'"~
f/lwA_/l ~
~\\:.OF
~"~~.... "' ~.
~
WCS\\FINAL\\15052\\
R161212_CISF REPORT
'* i"' 'Ill
.. '1
~.!a~
.......J.~1
~ DIANA G. DWORACZYK
~~. *r-.. *-Ho*-*** :z*eo H :/ii*
~)1l \\~ 63724 Iii;,
~t?-<-~~
"'-Q
{I; i#
~~~!i1/a~i"0~
~\\:?oNAL.t,~
'~
Diana Dworaczyk P.E. No. 63724 12 December 2016 CERTIFIED HUB & WBE REVISION2 12 DECEMBER 2016
Cii TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION PAGE
1.0 INTRODUCTION
............................................................................................................... 1 1.1 HYDROLOGIC DESCRIPTION................................................................................... 1 1.1.1 Hydrosphere........................................................................................................ 1 1.1.2 Site and Structures.............................................................................................. 3 2.0 FLOODS........................................................................................................................... 5 2.1 FLOOD HISTORY....................................................................................................... 5 2.2 FLOODPLAIN ANALYSIS DEVELOPED CONDITIONS............................................ 6 2.2.1 Description of Watershed.................................................................................... 6 2.2.2 Description of Hydrologic Analysis Methodology................................................ 7 2.2.3 Site Drainage and Model Strategy...................................................................... 9 2.2.3.1 Site Drainage............................................................................................. 9 2.2.3.2 Model Strategy......................................................................................... 10 3.0
SUMMARY
OF RESULTS.............................................................................................. 11
4.0 CONCLUSION
S.............................................................................................................. 12 5.0 OTHER CONSIDERATIONS.......................................................................................... 13
6.0 REFERENCES
................................................................................................................ 14 WCS\\FINAL I 150521 R161212_CISF REPORT ii REVISION 2 12 DECEMBER 2016
TABLE 1
2 3
FIGURE 1.1-1 1.1.2-1 1.1.2-2 2.2.1-1 APPENDIX APPENDIX A APPENDIX B APPENDIX C APPENDIX D APPENDIX E LIST OF TABLES POST-DEVELOPMENT DRAINAGE AREAS - PEAK FLOW POST-DEVELOPMENT DRAINAGE AREAS - RUNOFF VOLUMES POST-DEVELOPMENT ANALYSIS POINTS - PEAK ELEVATION LIST OF FIGURES SITE LOCATION AND SURROUNDING TOPOGRAPHY MAP DEVELOPED DRAINAGE PLAN DEVELOPED DRAINAGE AREA MAP SOILS BOUNDARY MAP LIST OF AP PEN DICES FLOOD PLAIN STUDY, FEBRUARY 2004 SOIL SURVEY CALCULATIONS HEC-HMS OUTPUT HEC-HMS INPUT (CD)
Cii WCS\\FINAL I 150521 R161212_CISF REPORT iii REVISION 2 12 DECEMBER 2016
Cii
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This report presents the results of a hydrologic and hydraulic analysis of the proposed conditions in and around the area of the Centralized Interim Storage Facility (CISF) proposed to be licensed by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission at the Waste Control Specialists, LLC (WCS) site located in Andrews County, Texas. This report is prepared in support of the Safety Analysis Report (SAR) as described at 10 CFR 72.24 and addresses items contained in the "Standard Review Plan for Spent Fuel Dry Storage Facilities", NUREG-1567, dated March 2000, Section 2.4.4 Surface Hydrology.
1.1 HYDROLOGIC DESCRIPTION The CISF site is located in western Andrews County, Texas nearly at the Texas - New Mexico border, just north of Texas Highway 176 approximately 31 miles west of Andrews, Texas and 5 miles east of Eunice, New Mexico. There are no maps of special flood hazard areas for this location published by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). The Site Location and Surrounding Topography Map, Figure 1.1-1, shows the CISF site location with respect to the surrounding topography and drainage features and the WCS property boundary.
1.1.1 Hydrosphere From a surface water perspective, the general area is characterized by ephemeral drainages, sheet flow, minor gullies and rills, internally-drained playas, and a salt lake basin (identified on Figure 1.1-1 as the Depression Pond).
The salt lake basin is the only naturally-occurring, perennial (year-round) water body located near the CISF site; the internally-drained salt lake basin is located approximately 5 miles from the eastern boundary of the CISF site and rarely has more than a few inches of water at scattered locations within the bottom footprint. Surface drainage from the CISF site does not flow into this basin.
Other perennial surface water features are man-made, including various stock tanks (often replenished by shallow windmill wells) located across the area and the feature denoted as the Fish Pond on Figure 1.1-1, which is located at the existing Permian Basin Materials quarry west of the CISF site and is also replenished by well water. In addition, Sundance Services, LLC operates the Parabo Disposal Facility for oil and gas waste on portions of the Permian Basin Materials quarry property. Water collects periodically in excavated and/or diked areas at this disposal facility and in the active quarry areas at this property adjacent to and west of the WCS property in New Mexico.
WCS\\FINAL I 150521 R161212_CISF REPORT 1
REVISION 2 12 DECEMBER 2016
Cii Baker Spring, another man-made feature, is located at a historic quarry on WCS property about 2, 150 ft west of the CISF site in Lea County, New Mexico.
This feature was formed by excavation of the caliche caprock to the top of the underlying red bed clays. After periods of rainfall, the depression holds water for some period until it evaporates. During wet cycles, the depression may hold water for an extended period; during dry cycles, the depression may be dry for extended periods.
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's National Weather Service Office for Hobbs, New Mexico indicates that the minimum average annual precipitation recorded is 2.01 inches in 2011 and the maximum average annual precipitation recorded is 32.19 inches in 1941.
The annual precipitation on average is approximately 14 inches.
The CISF site is located on the southwest-facing slope that transitions from the Southern High Plains to the Pecos Valley physiographic section. The Southern High Plains is an elevated area of undulating plains with low relief encompassing a large area of west Texas and eastern New Mexico. In Andrews County, the southwestern boundary of the Southern High Plains is poorly defined, but in this report is considered to be where the caprock caliche is at or relatively close to surface, such as on and near the CISF site.
The main surface water drainage in the area is Monument Draw, an ephemeral stream about 3 miles west of the WCS site in New Mexico. Ephemeral streams or drainage ways flow briefly only in direct response to precipitation in the immediate locality.
Monument Draw is a reasonably well-defined, southward-draining feature (although not through-going) that is identified on the USGS topographic maps that serve as the base map source for Figure 1.1-1.
An ephemeral drainage feature, referred to as the Ranch House Draw crosses the WCS property from east to west, generally to the south of the CISF site, as shown on Figure 1.1-1.
This feature is discernible from the topographic relief depicted on Figure 1.1-1, although it is much less pronounced than Monument Draw. This drainage feature is a relict drainage way that is choked with windblown sand and is not through-going to Monument Draw. Most of the drainage from the area of the CISF site is down slope toward the Ranch House Draw, with a small portion of the drainage from this area toward the southwest. Surface water eventually infiltrates into the windblown sands and dune fields to the south and southwest of the CISF site.
WCS\\FINAL I 150521 R161212_CISF REPORT 2
REVISION 2 12 DECEMBER 2016
Cii There are no ephemeral drainages that cross the CISF site. Most of the immediate area of the CISF site is drained from northwest to southeast by sheet flow. Sheet flow is a term describing overland flow or down slope movement of water taking the form of a thin, continuous film.
Playas, or small, internally-drained basins, occur on the WCS property. The playas are dry most of the time. Some of the playas occasionally hold water after relatively large precipitation events; however, the ponded water rapidly dissipates through infiltration, evaporation, and plant uptake. An established playa basin is present on the eastern edge of the CISF site. Surface topography maps indicate approximately 10 ft of relief in the playa.
The combination of low annual precipitation, relatively high potential evapotranspiration, permeable surficial soils down gradient of the CISF site, and topographic relief results in well-drained conditions. The engineering design and construction of the CISF site will eliminate areas that might promote ponding. Diversion berms and a collection ditch will direct stormwater from upstream drainage areas around the CISF.
There are no public or private surface water drinking-water supplies in the site vicinity. Potable water supply for the WCS facility is provided by the City of Eunice, which gets its water from wells in the Hobbs area. There are scattered windmills in the general area that take water from isolated pockets of groundwater perched on top of the red bed clay.
This water is utilized primarily for livestock watering.
1.1.2 Site and Structures The CISF site is defined as the area within the owner controlled fence and is approximately 320 acres as depicted on the Developed Drainage Plan, Figure 1.1.2-1. The CISF site is undeveloped and the existing land surface is fairly flat with an average slope of 0.8 percent(%).
The existing maximum and minimum elevations of the site are about 3520 ft and 3482 ft msl, respectively. The cover type is desert shrub. The existing WCS railroad is generally aligned parallel with and south of the proposed southern CISF site boundary.
The CISF storage area, which is within the CISF site, is defined as the area within the protected area fence whose boundary is defined by a rectangle 2360 feet by 2430 feet, as indicated on the Developed Drainage Plan, Figure 1.1.2-1.
Included in the storage area are the security/administration building, the transfer building, the storage pads and a portion of the CISF WCS\\FINAL I 150521 R161212_CISF REPORT 3
REVISION 2 12 DECEMBER 2016
Cii rail side track. The CISF storage area is approximately 132 acres and is graded for surface drainage with slopes of approximately 0.8 % from the northwest to the southeast. Developed elevations across the CISF storage area range from 3506 ft msl at the northwest corner to 3486 ft msl near the southeast corner.
All of the surface water runoff from the storage area will drain into the large playa southeast of the site. Flow arrows on Figure 1.1.2-2, Developed Drainage Area Map provide the detailed drainage patterns for the CISF site.
WCS\\FINAL I 150521 R161212_CISF REPORT 4
REVISION 2 12 DECEMBER 2016
Cii 2.0 FLOODS There is no evidence that the CISF site area has experienced flooding in the past. The ranch house drainage within the WCS property was evaluated as part of a Flood Plain Study conducted in February 2004 (Revised December 2004 and March 2006) for the Application for License to Authorize New-Surface Land Disposal of Low-Level Radioactive Waste (LLRW) that was approved by the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) in 2009 as Radioactive Material License No. R04100.
The 2004 Flood Plain Study as revised through March 2006 is provided as Appendix A and includes maps depicting the drainage areas within the WCS property and the location of the 100-year, 500-year and Probable Maximum Precipitation (PMP) flood plain. The 100-year flood plain extends across the southern portion of the WCS property area along the ranch house drainage. The northernmost limit of the 100-year floodplain is approximately 4,000 ft southeast of the CISF site while the northernmost limits of the 500-year and PMP floodplains are 3965 feet and 3895 feet southeast of the CISF site respectively.
The prior floodplain analysis indicated that the PMP elevation of the large playa located mostly east of the CISF site is 3488 ft msl. A portion of the CISF site is located over the large playa.
Elevations of the storage pads, security/administration building, and the transfer facility are above 3490 ft msl.
An analysis of the drainage features around the CISF site is performed for the PMP to ensure that the structures important to safety are safe from flooding.
2.1 FLOOD HISTORY The climate of the area is classified as semiarid, characterized by dry summers and mild, dry winters. Annual precipitation on average is approximately 14 inches and annual evaporation exceeds annual precipitation by nearly five times. The area is subject to occasionally winter storms, which produce brief snowfall events of short duration.
Rainfall records from July 2009 through December 2015, provided by WCS from a weather station near the CISF site, indicate an average annual rainfall of 12.6 inches and a maximum twenty-four hour rainfall total of 3.62 inches. According to WCS personnel, surface water runoff WCS\\FINAL I 150521 R161212_CISF REPORT 5
REVISION 2 12 DECEMBER 2016
Cii has not overflowed roads or existing drainage features at the WCS facility during this time frame.
2.2 FLOODPLAIN ANALYSIS DEVELOPED CONDITIONS This analysis identifies the limits of the watershed in which the CISF site is proposed to be located and determines the local peak flow rates and water elevations at the watershed analysis points resulting from the 100-year and 500-year frequency storm events and the Probable Maximum Precipitation event (PMP) after the CISF site is fully developed. This analysis also identifies the location of the local PMP floodplain associated with a large playa/depression located within the subject watershed.
2.2.1 Description of Watershed The contributing watershed that crosses the CISF site contains about 869 acres (1.4 square miles). For the most part, the CISF site is located on top of a hill and will be graded to allow drainage away from the site. Fully developed conditions result in four distinct drainage areas that predominantly slope away from the CISF site. The Developed Drainage Area Map, Figure 1.1.2-2, identifies the developed drainage area boundaries in relation to the CISF site and the associated analysis points described below.
Drainage Area P DA 1 contains 100.9 acres and drains the northwest portion of the site outside of the storage area. Analysis Point P AP 1 is located where surface water runoff from P DA 1 flows across State Line Road.
Drainage Area P DA 2 contains 46.1 acres and drains the southwest portion of the CISF site contained between the existing WCS railroad and the CISF rail side track outside of the storage area. Analysis Point P AP 2 is located at the western intersection of the CISF rail side track and the existing WCS railroad. Drainage Area P DA 3 contains 42.8 acres and drains the southeast portion of the CISF site bounded by the existing WCS railroad and the CISF rail side track. Surface water runoff from P DA 3 discharges into the large playa located east of the facility.
Drainage Area P DA 4 contains 679.3 acres encompassing the large playa and the majority of the CISF site; surface water from this portion of the CISF site also discharges into the large playa. Analysis Point P AP 3 refers to the location where surface water runoff in the large playa will overtop the existing ground to the south.
WCS\\FINAL I 150521 R161212_CISF REPORT 6
REVISION 2 12 DECEMBER 2016
Cii The watershed is located in Andrews County, Texas. The Custom Soil Resource Report for Andrews County, Texas, and Lea County, New Mexico, prepared by the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), located in Appendix B, shows the watershed contains soils from the Blakeney and Conger, Jalmar-Penwell, Ratliff, and Triomas and Wickett series. These soils are classified with the hydrologic groups A, B and D. Group A soils have high infiltration and transmission rates. Group B soils have moderate infiltration and transmission rates. Group D soils have very low infiltration and transmission rates.
The Soils Boundary Map with the CISF site location, topographic information and drainage area boundaries is included as Figure 2.2.1-1.
2.2.2 Description of Hydrologic Analysis Methodology Surface water runoff from the watershed in which the CISF site is located is modeled using the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Hydrologic Engineering Center's Hydrologic Modeling System (HEC-HMS), version 4.0. The rainfall amount for the 100-year frequency storm event is taken from the USDA Soil Conservation Service (SGS) Texas Engineering Technical Note No. 210-18-TX5, October 1990 (TETN 210). A 24-hour storm duration is used. The 100-year 24-hour rainfall amount from TETN 210 for the CISF site is six (6) inches and is the same rainfall amount used in the floodplain study in Appendix A. The 500-year, 24-hour and PMP, 72-hour rainfall amounts are taken from the floodplain study in Appendix A and are 8.71 inches and 40.5 inches, respectively. The precipitation amounts used as input for the HEC-HMS model are as follows:
Return Period 100-Year, 24 Hour 500-Year, 24 Hour PMP, 72 Hour Rainfall (In.)
6.0 8.71 40.5 Peak discharges from small watersheds are usually caused by intense, brief rainfalls. Utilizing synthetic rainfall distribution as taken from TETN 210 in this case is common practice instead of using actual storm events.
The synthetic Type II, 24-hour rainfall distribution for Andrews County, Texas, as shown on Figure 1 of TETN 210, and the SCS dimensionless unit hydrograph method are used for the model. The method requires curve numbers to indicate the WCS\\FINAL I 150521 R1 61212_CISF REPORT 7
REVISION 2 12 DECEMBER 2016
Cii runoff potential of a hydrologic soil-cover complex and watershed lag to model watershed response. The development of these values is described in the following paragraphs.
The curve number (CN) is computed based on land use, cover type, hydrologic condition and soil group. A December 16, 2015 site visit supported determination of land use, cover types and hydrologic condition. Hydrologic condition indicates the effects of cover type and treatment on infiltration and runoff. The hydrologic condition of the cover at the site is considered poor.
The soil group information is taken from the Soil Report in Appendix B. The variability of the CN from rainfall intensity and duration, total rainfall, soil moisture conditions, cover density, stage of growth, and temperature are collectively accounted for in the Antecedent Runoff Condition (ARC). The three classes of ARC are as follows: I for dry conditions, II for average conditions, and Ill for wetter conditions. Figure 5 of TETN 210 indicates that the ARC across the state of Texas varies greatly and Andrews County is ARC I. In order to be conservative and check the sensitivity of the model to the various ARC conditions, all three classes are used in the CN determinations and the model.
The USDA NRCS, Part 630 Hydrology, National Engineering Handbook (NEH) explains that lag is the delay between the time runoff from a rainfall event over a watershed begins until runoff reaches its maximum peak.
Lag is empirically estimated as six-tenths (0.6) of the time of concentration, (USDA NRCS, Part 630, NEH, Equation 15-3). The time of concentration is the time it takes for runoff to travel from the hydraulically most remote part of a watershed to a point of consideration. In hydrograph analysis it represents the time from the end of "excess rainfall" to the point of inflection of an SCS unit hydrograph.
Time of concentration is computed by determining the travel times for different segments of the flow path. The segments consist of sheet flow, shallow concentrated flow and concentrated flow. The sheet flow and shallow concentrated flow components are calculated for all of the drainage areas using the equations from USDA SCS Technical Release 55, Urban Hydrology for Small Watersheds. Drainage Areas P DA 1 and P DA 2, as shown on Figure 1.1.2-2, also exhibit channelized flow. Broad channelized flow occurs in P DA 1 as the surface water flows southwest out of the CISF site and crosses State Line Road. Channelized flow occurs in P DA 2 as the surface water flows southwest in the existing ditch along the northern side of the existing WCS railroad.
Concentrated flow is calculated based on the flow velocity for the WCS\\FINAL I 150521 R161212_CISF REPORT 8
REVISION 2 12 DECEMBER 2016
Cii channel being analyzed. Channel velocities are calculated using Manning's Equation or they are estimated based on the results of the HEC-HMS model.
All time of concentration parameters for the various drainage areas are included in Appendix C, Calculations.
Storage, elevation, and outflow curves are developed for the playa/depression located within the subject watershed to determine its effect on the runoff from this area and are included in Appendix C. All watershed parameters that are topography dependent are based on the WCS provided aerial survey dated May 29, 2014 flown by Dallas Aerial Surveys, Inc and the WCS provided proposed CISF elevations.
2.2.3 Site Drainage and Model Strategy The CISF site drainage features consist of a collection ditch and four culverts through the CISF rail side track that are located as shown on the Developed Drainage Plan, Figure 1.1.2-1. The design criterion for the site drainage features are the 100-Year, 24 Hour, ARC I, peak flow rates as determined by HEC-HMS. Whenever possible, surface water runoff will be maintained as sheet flow. Conservative input parameters and strategies are used in the HEC-HMS modeling of the peak flow rates.
2.2.3.1 Site Drainage Surface water runoff from the up gradient area north of the storage area will be diverted by a collection ditch located just north of the storage area boundary as shown on Figure 1.1.2-1.
Onsite surface water runoff will be mainly sheet flow off of the sloped storage pads and the sloped areas in between the pads.
The land surface adjacent to the eastern and western perimeters of the storage pads will be sloped to drain as sheet flow toward the protected area fence and beyond through the owner controlled area fence. Surface water runoff between the collection ditch and the northern storage pads within the storage area will sheet flow to the southeast. Surface water runoff south of Phase 1 storage pad will drain southeast into Culvert 2 under the CISF rail side track just west of the transfer building. Surface water runoff south of the Phase 5 storage pad and the CISF rail side track will sheet flow to the east.
The transfer building roof drains half to the north and half to the south. The western portion of the area between the CISF rail side track and the existing railroad outside of the storage area will drain to the west with some of the surface water runoff flowing through the existing culvert WCS\\FINAL I 150521 R161212_CISF REPORT 9
REVISION 2 12 DECEMBER 2016
Cii under the WCS railroad crossing at State Line Road and the rest of it flowing through Culvert 1 into existing surroundings. The eastern portion of the area between the CISF rail side track and existing railroad will drain to the east and empty into the large playa through Culverts 3 and 4.
2.2.3.2 Model Strategy Conservative parameters are input into the HEC-HMS model to determine peak runoff rates and overflow elevations. Conservative assumptions include the following: (1) all areas inside the storage area are assumed to be impervious for the CN calculation; (2) all three ARC conditions are used for the CN calculation even though Andrews County exhibits ARC I conditions; (3) no consideration is given to initial losses or infiltration rates of the precipitation; (4) all culverts are presumed clogged and do not allow any flow through them; and (5) the collection ditch and berms are not in place in order to model the greatest possible area contributing runoff into the playa. The probable maximum flood (PMF) flow is modeled over the existing railroad and the proposed CISF rail side track.
WCS\\FINAL I 150521 R161212_CISF REPORT 10 REVISION 2 12 DECEMBER 2016
Cii 3.0
SUMMARY
OF RESULTS The Developed Drainage Area Map, Figure 1.1.2-2 delineates the subject watershed including drainage areas and analysis points. The 100-year, 500-year, and PMP peak discharges for each drainage area and ARC condition as determined by the HEC-HMS model are shown in Table 1, Post-Development Drainage Areas - Peak Flow. The 100-year, 500-year, and PMP runoff volumes for each drainage area and ARC condition as determined by the HEC-HMS model are shown in Table 2, Post-Development Drainage Areas - Runoff Volumes.
The 100-year, 500-year, and PMP water surface elevations at analysis points as determined by HEC-HMS for every ARC condition are shown in Table 3, Post-Development Analysis Points -
Peak Elevation.
At Analysis Point 1, the peak discharge resulting from all modeled storm events flows over State Line Road. The peak discharge (during the PMP and ARC Ill conditions) is 424 cubic feet per second (CFS).
The maximum depth of flow over the road (during the PMP and ARC Ill conditions) is approximately 0.8 ft. which is equivalent to elevation 3487.3 ft. msl.
The peak discharge resulting from all modeled storm events flows over the railroad tracks at Analysis Point 2. The peak discharge (during the 500-year and ARC Ill conditions) is 284 CFS.
The maximum depth of water over the rail (during the 500-year and ARC Ill) is approximately 1.4 ft. which is equivalent to elevation 3466.4 ft. msl.
The playa/depression contains all the runoff from drainage areas P DA 3 and P DA 4. The limit of the PMP, ARC Ill condition, water surface elevation of the playa/depression based on the topographic information provided by WCS is 3488.9 ft. msl and is shown on Figure 1.1.2-2, Developed Drainage Area Map.
The results indicate that the playa/depression does not discharge during the 100-year frequency event but does discharge at Analysis Point 3 during the other modeled events. The peak discharge (during the PMP and ARC Ill conditions) flowing out of the playa is 3005 CFS.
The depth of the PMP, ARC Ill, peak discharge flow over the railroad tracks at Analysis Point 3 is approximately 1.5 ft. which is equivalent to elevation 3488.9 ft. msl.
WCS\\FINAL I 150521 R161212_CISF REPORT 11 REVISION 2 12 DECEMBER 2016
Cii
4.0 CONCLUSION
S The local PMP floodplain analysis yields the PMF elevation near the CISF site of 3488.9 ft msl.
Elevations of the storage pads vary from 3490 ft msl to 3504 ft msl.
Elevations of the foundations of the security/administration building and the transfer facility are 3496 ft msl and 3493 ft msl, respectively.
WCS\\FINAL I 150521 R161212_CISF REPORT 12 REVISION 2 12 DECEMBER 2016
Cii 5.0 OTHER CONSIDERATIONS The naturally occurring playa/depression will reach its maximum elevation for a brief time as the surface water flows out over the rail and the natural ground and infiltrates into the existing ground.
At the peak elevation the area of the water surface in the playa/ depression is approximately 280 acres which is too small to produce any wind wave activity.
No PMP analysis of perennial streams or rivers is considered since they do not exist in the vicinity of the CISF site.
There are no dams on any upgradient areas from the site; therefore, no analysis is required.
Since no large bodies of water exist near the site, no surge, seiche, or ice flooding is possible.
The site is located 480 miles from the Gulf of Mexico, which is the nearest coastal area; therefore, no tsunami sea waves are possible.
There are no liquid releases that result from the normal operation of the CISF.
The local short-term overland flow depth of surface water runoff and velocity on the CISF Phase 1 pad for the 500-year rainfall event are calculated using Manning's Equation. The maximum rainfall intensity for all analyzed storms is used which is the 500-year rainfall event and is taken from the HEC-HMS output. Calculations are found in Appendix C and the results are as follows:
Maximum depth: 1.1 inches Maximum velocity: 1.7 feet/second WCS\\FINAL I 150521 R161212_CISF REPORT 13 REVISION 2 12 DECEMBER 2016
Cii
6.0 REFERENCES
Waste Control Specialists LLC, Application for License to Authorize Near-Surface Land Disposal of Low-Level Radioactive Waste, Appendix 2.4.1: Flood Plain Study, March 2006.
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. Custom Soil Resource Report for Andrews, County, Texas, and Lea County, New Mexico, December 2015.
United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service.
Texas Engineering Technical Note No. 210-18-TX5, October 1990 (TETN 210).
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. Part 630 Hydrology, National Engineering Handbook (NEH), Chapter 15, Time of Concentration, May 2010.
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service Technical Release 55. June 1986. Urban Hydrology for Small Watersheds.
WCS\\FINAL I 150521 R161212_CISF REPORT 14 REVISION 2 12 DECEMBER 2016
WCS\\FINAL I 150521 R161212_CISF REPORT TABLES Cii REVISION 2 12 DECEMBER 2016
ARCI ARC II ARC Ill WCS\\FINAL\\150521 T161212_TABLES TABLE 1 WCS - CISF FLOOD ANALYSIS POST-DEVELOPMENT DRAINAGE AREAS - PEAK FLOW Drainage 100 YR SOOYR PMP Area Peak Flow Peak Flow Peak Flow (CFS)
(CFS)
(CFS)
P DA 1 118.3 245.4 410.7 PDA2 118.1 209.2 191.1 PDA3 127.5 218.2 178.4 PDA4 803.6 1523.1 2786.9 Drainage 100 YR SOOYR PMP Area Peak Flow Peak Flow Peak Flow (CFS)
(CFS)
(CFS)
P DA 1 223.4 373.1 421.5 PDA2 170.8 264.8 193.1 PDA3 173.8 265.4 179.8 PDA4 1324.0 2113.8 2839.4 Drainage 100 YR SOOYR PMP Area Peak Flow Peak Flow Peak Flow (CFS)
(CFS)
(CFS)
P DA 1 292.0 440.6 424.2 PDA2 193.2 284.4 193.5 PDA3 191.1 279.9 180.1 PDA4 1574.7 2346.9 2849.7 Cii REVISION 2 12 DECEMBER 2016
TABLE 2 WCS - CISF FLOOD ANALYSIS POST-DEVELOPMENT DRAINAGE AREAS - RUNOFF VOLUMES ARCI ARC II ARC Ill WCS\\FINAL\\150521 T161212_TABLES Drainage Area P DA 1 P DA2 PDA3 PDA4 Drainage Area P DA 1 PDA2 PDA3 PDA4 Drainage Area P DA 1 P DA2 PDA3 PDA4 100 YR Runoff Volume (IN) 2.09 3.09 3.38 2.62 100 YR Runoff Volume (IN) 3.68 4.52 4.74 4.20 100 YR Runoff Volume (IN) 4.96 5.41 5.53 5.18 SOOYR PMP Runoff Volume Runoff Volume (IN)
(IN) 4.11 33.97 5.44 36.38 5.81 36.94 4.84 35.35 SOOYR PMP Runoff Volume Runoff Volume (IN)
(IN) 6.17 37.48 7.14 38.76 7.38 39.05 6.78 38.30 SOOYR PMP Runoff Volume Runoff Volume (IN)
(IN) 7.63 39.34 8.11 39.88 8.23 40.00 7.87 39.61 Cii REVISION 2 12 DECEMBER 2016
TABLE 3 WCS - CISF FLOOD ANALYSIS POST-DEVELOPMENT ANALYSIS POINTS - PEAK ELEVATION Analysis 100 YR SOOYR PMP Point MAXWSE MAXWSE MAXWSE (FT)
(FT)
(FT)
PAP 1 3486.9 3487.1 3487.2 PAP2 3466.0 3466.3 3466.2 PAP3 3484.4 3485.8 3488.8 Analysis 100 YR SOOYR PMP Point MAXWSE MAXWSE MAXWSE (FT)
(FT)
(FT)
PAP 1 3487.0 3487.2 3487.3 PAP2 3466.2 3466.4 3466.2 PAP3 3485.4 3486.5 3488.9 Analysis 100 YR SOOYR PMP Point MAXWSE MAXWSE MAXWSE (FT)
(FT)
(FT)
PAP 1 3487.1 3487.3 3487.3 PAP2 3466.2 3466.4 3466.2 PAP3 3486.0 3486.8 3488.9
- 1. Water surface elevation (WSE) represent elevation above mean sea level (AMSL).
Cii
- 2. Elevations are taken from topographic aerial survey provided by Dallas Aerial Surveys, Inc., flown 5-29-2014.
10220 Forest Lane, Dallas, Texas 214-349-2190, 800-862-2190, Fax 214-349-2193.
WCS\\FINAL\\150521 T161212_TABLES REVISION 2 12 DECEMBER 2016
WCS\\FINAL I 150521 R161212_CISF REPORT FIGURES Cii REVISION 2 12 DECEMBER 2016
_..,.5 S: \\ CAO\\ WCS\\15052 CISF Floodploin\\ 15052003 -
- 1. 1-1.dwg, 3/ 8/ 20163:13:55 PM, 1: I
,,,,.--J r
()
~.7) 6000 3000 0
6000
- I - 1~~1~~~~1 (SCALE IN FEET)
LEGEND CISF OWNER CONTROLLED FENCE (site)
WCS PROPERTY BOUNDARY CISF LOACTION PROVIDED BY WCS.
WWW.USGS.GOV 2012 REV. DATE TH E T E XA S SOLUTION C
- caaK-JDVCE INC.
'I ENGINEERING AND CONSULTING 812 WEST ELEVENTH 512-474-9097
HUB & WBE CERTIFIED TEXAS REGISTERED ENGINEERING FIRM F-883 PROJECT:
CENTRALIZED INTERIM STORAGE FACILITY ANDREWS COUNTY, TEXAS SHEET TITLE:
SITE LOCATION AND SURROUNDING TOPOGRAPHY MAP DES BY DD DR BY SOB CHK BY DD APP BY DD DATE ISSUED: 03-08-2016 PURPOSE:
SCALE:
SEE BAR SCALE PROJECT NO. 15052.01 CJI NO. 15052003 SHEET 1 OF 1 SHEETS FIGURE NO. 1
- 1 _ 1
\\\\' @.. I)
/'-'..
S:\\CAD\\WCS\\ 15052 CISF Floodplain\\15052007Rl - DEVELOPED DRAINAGE PLAN.dwg, 12/12/2016 3:09:16 PM 600 300 0
600 \\
~I ~~I 1---1 (SCALE IN FEET)
LEGEND CISF OWNER CONTROLLED AREA FENCE EXISTING MINOR CONTOUR
-3490-EXISTING MAJOR CONTOUR PROPOSED MINOR CONTOUR
~3490--
PROPOSED MAJOR CONTOUR NOTES:
- 1.
EXISTING TOPOGRAPHIC INFORMATION WITHIN LIMITS SHOWN PROVIDED BY DALLAS AERIAL SURVEYS, INC., FLOWN 5-29-2014. 10220 FOREST LANE, DALLAS, TEXAS 214-349-2190, 800-862-2190, FAX 214-349-2193.
- 2.
EXISTING TOPOGRAPHIC INFORMATION OUTSIDE OF THE LIMITS SHOWN IS BASED ON A DIGITAL ELEVATION MODEL (DEM) PROVIDED BY THE TEXAS NATURAL RESOURCE INFORMATION SYSTEM (TNRIS).
12/16 REVISE PROPOSED CONTOURS REV. DATE DR BY APP BY
(
- caaK*JDVCE INC.
'I ENGINEERING AND CONSUL TING 812 WEST ELEVENTH 512-474-9D97
HUB & WBE CERTIFIED TEXAS REGISTERED ENGINEERING FIRM F-883 PRO.ECT:
CENTRALIZED INTERIM STORAGE FACILITY ANDREWS COUNTY, TEXAS SHEET Till.E:
DEVELOPED DRAINAGE PLAN DES BY AW SCAL£:
SEE BAR SCAL£ THIS DRAWING IS ISSUED FOR PERMITTING OR LICENSING PURPOSES. IT IS NOT INTENDED FOR BIDDING OR CONSTRUCTION PURPOSES.
DR BY AW CHK BY DD APP BY DD DATE ISSUED: 02-15-2016 PROJECT NO. 15052.01 CJI NO. 15052007R1 SHEET 1 OF 1 SHEETS FIGURE N0.1.1.2-1 DIANA DWORACZYK P.E. No. 63724 CLIENT REVIEW
S:\\CAD\\WCS\\15052 CISF Flood plain\\ 15052005R2 - 1.1.2-2.dwg, 12/12/2016 2:47:53 PM 1000 500 0
1000
~I ~I iiiiiiiiiiiiiil--*I (SCALE IN FEET)
LEGEND
- DRAINAGE AREA BOUNDARY LIMITS OF TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY BY 0
DALLAS AERIAL SURVEY 5-29-2014 ANALYSIS POINT DIRECTION OF FLOW APPROXIMATE PLAYA PMP WSE
-- - -- FLOODPLAIN LIMIT CISF OWNER CONTROLLED AREA FENCE EXISTING MINOR CONTOUR
-3490--
EXISTING MAJOR CONTOUR PROPOSED MINOR CONTOUR
-349~ PROPOSED MAJOR CONTOUR NOTES:
- 1.
EXISTING TOPOGRAPHIC INFORMATION WITHIN LIMITS SHOWN PROVIDED BY DALLAS AERIAL SURVEYS, INC., FLOWN 5 2014. 10220 FOREST LANE, DALLAS, TEXAS 214-349-2190, 800-862-2190, FAX 214-349-2193.
- 2.
EXISTING TOPOGRAPHIC INFORMATION OUTSIDE OF THE LIMITS SHOWN IS BASED ON A DIGITAL ELEVATION MODEL (DEM) PROVIDED BY THE TEXAS NATURAL RESOURCE INFORMATION SYSTEM (TNRIS).
- 3.
DEVELOPED DRAINAGE AREAS REPRESENT THE ABSENCE OF PROPOSED BERMS OR DITCHES.
2 2/16 EMOVE FLOW PAlH INFO, DD DD EVISE DRAINAGE AREAS, ROPOSED CONTOURS, PLAYA MIT DD REV. DAlE DR BY APP BY
(
- caaK-JDVCE INC.
'I ENGINEERING AND CONSULTING 812 WEST EL.EVENlH 512-474-9097
--AUSTIN, lEXAS 78701--
HUB & WBE CERTIFIED TEXAS REGISTERED ENGINEERING FIRM F-883 PROJECT:
CENTRAL INTERIM STORAGE FACILITY ANDREWS COUNTY, TEXAS SHEET TiltE:
DEVELOPED DRAINAGE AREA MAP DES BY AW SCALE:
SEE BAR SCALE DR BY AW PROJECT NO. 15052.01 CHK BY DD CJI NO. 15052005R2 APP BY DD SHEET 1 OF 1 SHEETS DAlE ISSUED: 03-08-2016 FIGURE NO. 1
- 1
- 2-2
S:\\CAD\\WCS\\15052 CISF Flood plain\\15052006Rl - 2.2.1-1.dwg, 12/12/2016 2:44:07 PM 1000 500 0
1000
- 1-1
!*---1 (SCALE IN FEET)
LEGEND
SOILS BOUNDARY LIMITS OF TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY BY
DALLAS AERIAL SURVEY 5-29-2014 CISF OWNER CONTROLLED AREA FENCE
- * * * * * * *
- DRAINAGE BOUNDARY REDBED /
CALICHE
STOCKPILE AREA Symbol BcB lmB JPC RaB TwB BS SE SR Soils Information Group Name County D
Blakeney & Conger Andrews Co, TX A
Ima Andrews Co, TX A/B Jalmar-Penwell Andrews Co, TX B
Ratliff Andrews Co, TX B
Triomas & Wickett Andrews Co, TX A/B Brownfield-Springer Lea Co, N.M.
D Simona Lea Co, N.M.
D Simona-Upton Lea Co, N.M.
1 12/16 REVISE DRAINAGE AREAS REV. DATE
(
- caaK-JDVCE INC.
'I ENGINEERING AND CONSUL TING 812 WEST ELEVENlH 512-474-9097
HUB & WBE CERTIFIED TEXAS REGISTERED ENGINEERING FIRM F-883 PROJECT:
CENTRALIZED INTERIM STORAGE FACILITY ANDREWS COUNTY, TEXAS SHEET TiltE:
SOILS BOUNDARY MAP DES BY AW SCALE:
SEE BAR SCALE THIS DRAWING IS ISSUED FOR PERMITTING OR LICENSING PURPOSES. IT IS NOT INTENDED FOR BIDDING OR CONSTRUCTION PURPOSES.
DR BY AW CHK BY DD APP BY DD PROJECT NO. 15052.01 CJI NO. 15052006R1 SHEET 1 OF 1
SHEETS DIANA DWORACZYK P.E. No. 63724 DATE ISSUED: 03-08-2016 FIGURE N02* 2.1 _ 1
WCS\\FINAL I 150521 R161212_CISF REPORT APPENDICES Cii REVISION 2 12 DECEMBER 2016
WCS\\FINAL I 150521 R161212_CISF REPORT APPENDIX A FLOOD PLAIN STUDY, FEBRUARY 2004 Cii REVISION 2 12 DECEMBER 2016
August2, 2004 APPLICATION FOR LICENSE TO AUTHORIZE NEAR-SURFACE LAND DISPOSAL OF LOW-LEVEL RADIOACTIVE WASTE Appendix 2.4.1: Flood Plain Study APPENDIX 2.4.1 FLOOD PLAIN STUDY 2.4.1-1 APP A-1
ATTACHMENT 11.F.
FLOOD PLAIN STUDY FEBRUARY 2004 (REVISED DECEMBER 2004 AND MARCH 2006)
Prepared for:
Waste Control Specialists LLC Andrews, Texas Prepared by:
Frederick H. Haas, P.E..
812 West Eleventh Street Austin, Texas 78701 This document is issued for interim review purposes only.
Frederick H.. Haas, P.. E.., No. 55490 WCS\\FINAL\\03047\\03047.05\\TECHNICAL NOD 21 TNOD 2 RESPONSES & DOCUMENTS\\FLOOD PLAIN\\
R060331_FLOODPLAIN RPT DOC APPA-2 REVISION 11 31 MARCH 2006
TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION PAGE
1.0 INTRODUCTION
................................................................................................... 1-1
2.0 DESCRIPTION
OF WATERSHED........................................................................ 2-1
3.0 DESCRIPTION
OF HYDROLOGIC ANALYSIS.................................................... 3-1
4.0 DESCRIPTION
OF HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS........................................................ 4-1 5.0
SUMMARY
OF RESULTS..................................................................................... 5-1 6.0 IMPACT OF DEVELOPMENT OF THE LOW LEVEL AND BYPRODUCT FACILITY ON THE FLOODPLAIN................................................. 6-1 7.0 IMPACT OF CHANGES IN ANTECEDENT MOISTURE CONDITION ON THE FLOODPLAIN......................................................................................... 7-1 WCS\\FINAL\\03047103047.05\\TECHNICAL NOD 21 TNOD 2 RESPONSES & DOCUMENTS\\FLOOD PLAIN\\
R060331_FLOODPLAIN RPT.DOC ii APPA-3 REVISION 11 31 MARCH 2006
LIST OF TABLES TABLE 11.F.1 100-YEAR PEAK DISCHARGE 11.F.2 100-YEAR WATER SURFACE ELEVATIONS 11.F.3 500-YEAR AND PMP PEAK DISCHARGE 11.F.4 500-YEAR WATER SURFACE ELEVATIONS 11.F.5 PMP WATER SURFACE ELEVATIONS 11.F.6 DEVELOPED LOW LEVEL & BYPRODUCT FACILITY 100-YEAR PEAK DISCHARGE 11.F.7 DEVELOPED LOW LEVEL & BYPRODUCT FACILITY 100-YEAR WATER SURFACE ELEVATIONS 11.F.8 DEVELOPED LOW LEVEL & BYPRODUCT FACILITY 500-YEAR AND PMP PEAK DISCHARGE 11.F.9 DEVELOPED LOW LEVEL & BYPRODUCT FACILITY 500-YEAR WATER SURFACE ELEVATIONS 11.F.10 DEVELOPED LOW LEVEL & BYPRODUCT FACILITY PMP WATER SURFACE ELEVATIONS 11.F.11 100-YEAR PEAK DISCHARGE, ANTECEDENT MOISTURE CONDITION 11 11.F.12 100-YEAR WATER SURFACE ELEVATIONS, ANTECEDENT MOISTURE CONDITION II 11.F.13 500-YEAR AND PMP PEAK DISCHARGE, ANTECEDENT MOISTURE CONDITION II 11.F.14 500-YEAR WATER SURFACE ELEVATIONS, ANTECEDENT MOISTURE CONDITION II 11.F.15 PMP WATER SURFACE ELEVATIONS, ANTECEDENT MOISTURE CONDITION II 11.F.16 100-YEAR PEAK DISCHARGE, ANTECEDENT MOISTURE CONDITION Ill 11.F.17 100-YEAR WATER SURFACE ELEVATIONS, ANTECEDENT MOISTURE CONDITION 111 11.F.18 500-YEAR AND PMP PEAK DISCHARGE, ANTECEDENT MOISTURE CONDITION Ill W CS\\FINAL\\03047103047.05\\TECHNICAL NOD 21 TNOD 2 RESPONSES & DOCUMENTS\\FLOOD PLAIN\\
R060331_FLOODPLAIN RPT.DOC iii APPA-4 REVISION 11 31 MARCH 2006
LIST OF TABLES - continued TABLE 11.F.19 500-YEAR WATER SURFACE ELEVATIONS, ANTECEDENT MOISTURE CONDITION 111 11.F.20 PMP WATER SURFACE ELEVATIONS, ANTECEDENT MOISTURE CONDITION Ill WCS\\FINAL\\03047103047.05\\TECHNICAL NOD 21 TNOD 2 RESPONSES & DOCUMENTS\\FLOOD PLAIN\\
R060331_FLOODPLAIN RPT.DOC iv APPA-5 REVISION 11 31 MARCH 2006
LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE 11.F.1 DRAINAGE AREA MAP 11.F.2 SOILS MAP 11.F.3 PHOTOGRAPHS 11.F.4 FLOODPLAIN MAP 11.F.5 DEVELOPED LOW LEVEL & BYPRODUCT FACILITY DRAINAGE AREA MAP 11.F.6 DEVELOPED LOW LEVEL & BYPRODUCT FACILITY SOILS MAP WCS\\FINAL\\03047103047.05\\TECHNICAL NOD 21 TNOD 2 RESPONSES & DOCUMENTS\\FLOOD PLAIN\\
R060331_FLOODPLAIN RPT.DOC v
APPA-6 REVISION 11 31 MARCH 2006
LIST OF APPENDICES APPENDIX A
DRAINAGE CALCULATIONS B
HEC-HMS MODEL FOR THE CALCULATION OF THE 100-YEAR PEAK DISCHARGES C
HEC-RAS MODEL FOR THE CALCULATION OF THE 100-YEAR WATER SURFACE PROFILE D
HEC-HMS MODEL FOR THE CALCULATION OF THE 500-YEAR PEAK DISCHARGES E
HEC-HMS MODEL FOR THE CALCULATION OF THE PMP PEAK DISCHARGES F
HEC-RAS MODEL FOR THE CALCULATION OF THE 500-YEAR AND PMP WATER SURFACE PROFILES G
HEC-HMS MODEL FOR THE CALCULATION OF THE DEVELOPED LOW LEVEL &
BYPRODUCT FACILITY 100-YEAR PEAK DISCHARGES H
HEC-RAS MODEL FOR THE CALCULATION OF THE DEVELOPED LOW LEVEL &
BYPRODUCT FACILITY 100-YEAR WATER SURFACE PROFILES HEC-HMS MODEL FOR THE CALCULATION OF THE DEVELOPED LOW LEVEL &
BYPRODUCT FACILITY 500-YEAR PEAK DISCHARGES J
HEC-HMS MODEL FOR THE CALCULATION OF THE DEVELOPED LOW LEVEL &
BYPRODUCT FACILITY PMP PEAK DISCHARGES K
HEC-RAS MODEL FOR THE CALCULATION OF THE DEVELOPED LOW LEVEL &
BYPRODUCT FACILITY 500-YEAR AND PMP WATER SURFACE PROFILES L
HEC-HMS 100-YEAR MODEL FOR THE CALCULATION OF THE 100-YEAR PEAK DISCHARGE, ANTECEDENT MOISTURE CONDITION II M
HEC-RAS MODEL FOR THE CALCULATION OF THE 100-YEAR WATER SURFACE PROFILE, ANTECEDENT MOISTURE CONDITION II N
HEC-RAS MODEL FOR THE CALCULATION OF THE 500-YEAR WATER SURFACE PROFILE, ANTECEDENT MOISTURE CONDITION II 0
HEC-HMS MODEL FOR THE CALCULATION OF THE PMP PEAK DISCHARGE, ANTECEDENT MOISTURE CONDITION II P
HEC-RAS MODEL FOR THE CALCULATION OF THE 500-YEAR AND PMP WATER SURFACE PROFILES, ANTECEDENT MOISTURE CONDITION II WCS\\FINAL\\03047103047.05\\TECHNICAL NOD 21 TNOD 2 RESPONSES & DOCUMENTS\\FLOOD PLAIN\\
R060331_FLOODPLAIN RPT.DOC vi APPA-7 REVISION 11 31 MARCH 2006
LIST OF APPENDICES - continued APPENDIX Q
HEC-HMS MODEL FOR THE CALCULATION OF THE 100-YEAR PEAK DISCHARGE, ANTECEDENT MOISTURE CONDITION Ill R
HEC-RAS MODEL FOR THE CALCULATION OF THE 100-YEAR WATER SURFACE PROFILE, ANTECEDENT MOISTURE CONDITION Ill S
HEC-HMS MODEL FOR THE CALCULATION OF THE 500-YEAR PEAK DISCHARGE, ANTECEDENT MOISTURE CONDITION Ill T
HEC-HMS MODEL FOR THE CALCULATION OF THE PMP PEAK DISCHARGE, ANTECEDENT MOISTURE CONDITION Ill U
HEC-RAS MODEL FOR THE CALCULATION OF THE 500-YEAR AND PMP WATER SURFACE PROFILES, ANTECEDENT MOISTURE CONDITION Ill W CS\\FINAL\\03047103047.05\\TECHNICAL NOD 21 TNOD 2 RESPONSES & DOCUMENTS\\FLOOD PLAIN\\
R060331_FLOODPLAIN RPT.DOC vii APPA-8 REVISION 11 31 MARCH 2006
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The following report presents the results of a hydrologic and hydraulic analysis for Waste Control Specialist LLC (WCS) Andrews County, Texas Facility.
This report is prepared in support of the licensing and permitting activities at the WCS facility.
In accordance with applicable requirements, this analysis identifies the location of the 100-year floodplain to determine its location with respect to the facility. There are no maps of special flood hazard areas for this location published by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).This analysis also identifies the location of the floodplain resulting from the 500-year frequency storm event and the Probable Maximum Precipitation (PMP).
This report includes the following items.
Description of watershed Description of hydrologic analysis Description of hydraulic analysis Summary of Results WCSIFINAL\\03047.04\\DEC 2004 ANOD R041217 _FLOODPLAIN RPT.DOC 1-1 APPA-9 REVISION 3 17 DECEMBER 2004
2.0 DESCRIPTION
OF WATERSHED There is a draw that crosses the southern portion of the facility. This draw crosses the facility north of the RCRA permit boundary and south of the process area. The draw flows from east to west across the facility. The draw crosses under the access road west of the facility through six (6) - 29 inches by 18 inches corrugated metal pipe-arch culverts. The draw continues south and west downstream and crosses under State Highway 176 through two (2) - 43 inches by 27 inches corrugated metal pipe-arch culverts. After crossing the state highway the draw continues to the west and south downstream and ultimately drains into Monument Draw.
The contributing watershed to the draw that crosses the facility contains about 1350 acres (2.1 square miles). This contributing watershed is divided into six (6) sub areas (Drainage Areas 1A, 1 B, 3, 4, SA, & 58) to model the runoff into the draw within the facility.
There is another drainage area (Drainage Area 6) downstream of the access road that contributes runoff to the reach of the draw between the access road and the state highway. There is also a drainage area (Drainage Area 7) adjacent to State Highway 176 that crosses the access road through an 18 inches diameter corrugated metal pipe. This area contributes runoff to the two (2) - 43 inches by 27 inches corrugated metal pipe-arch culverts under State Highway 176.
There is a playa/depression in the area near the northeast corner of the facility.
The contributing watershed (Drainage Area 2) that drains into this depression contains about 680 acres (1.1 square miles). This watershed was modeled to determine if the runoff is contained within the depression or if there is an overflow that contributes runoff to the draw that crosses the facility.
The results indicate that Drainage Area 2 does not discharge from the playa/depression during the 100 and 500-year frequency storm events.
The Drainage Area Map is included as Figure 11.F.1.
The watershed is characterized by gently rolling terrain with slopes ranging from about one-half percent (0.5%) to about four and a half percent (4.5%). The average slope in the watershed is about one percent (1 %).
The land is mostly undeveloped except for the facility and the highway. The cover type is desert shrub. The hydrologic condition of the cover ranges from fair in the southern portion of the watershed to poor in the northern portion of the watershed.
WCS\\FINAL\\03047.04\\DEC 2004 ANOD R041217 _FLOODPLAIN RPT.DOC 2-1 APPA-10 REVISION 3 17 DECEMBER 2004
The watershed is located in Andrews County. The Soil Survey of Andrews County Texas, prepared by the USDA, Soil Conservation Service (SCS) shows the watershed contains soils from the Blakeney, Faskin, Ima, Jalmar, Kimbrough, Ratliff, and Triomas series. These soils are classified with the hydrologic groups A, B and C. Group A soils have high infiltration and transmission rates. Group B soils have moderate infiltration and transmission rates. Group C soils have low infiltration and transmission rates. The soils map is included as Figure 11.F.2.
Please note that the SCS has changed its name since the publication of this document to the National Resources Conservation Service (NRCS).
WCS\\FINAL\\03047.04\\DEC 2004 ANOD R041217 _FLOODPLAIN RPT.DOC 2-2 APP A-11 REVISION 3 17 DECEMBER 2004
3.0 DESCRIPTION
OF HYDROLOGIC ANALYSIS The watershed runoff is modeled using the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Hydrologic Engineering Center's Hydrologic Modeling System (HEC-HMS), version 2.2.1.
The existing 100-year and 500-year storm events and the PMP are the only conditions modeled.
The rainfall amount for the 100-year frequency storm event is taken from the U.S. Weather Bureau, Technical Paper 40, (TP-40). A 24-hour storm duration is used. The 100-year 24-hour rainfall amount from TP-40 for this facility is six (6) inches. An SCS type II rainfall distribution is used.
The rainfall amount for the 500-year frequency storm event is calculated based on the procedure in Depth-Duration Frequency of Precipitation for Texas, Water Resources Investigations Report 98-4044, W.H. Asquith, U.S. Geological Survey, 1998.
The General Logistic (GLO) Distribution Equation is used to determine the precipitation depth for the 500-year storm event.
The parameter, K, in the GLO distribution is a shape parameter.
It is estimated to be between -0.20 and -0.22 for the 24-hour storm event. The shape parameter, K, estimate of -0.20 results in the 500-year 24-hour rainfall amount for this facility of 8.71 inches.
The shape parameter, K, estimate of -0.22 results in the 500-year 24-hour rainfall amount for this facility of 9.24 inches.
Each of these precipitation amounts is input into the HEC-HMS model. The results of the HEC-HMS model are input into HEC-RAS to determine the sensitivity of the 500-year water surface elevation to the shape parameter, K The water surface elevations change less than one inch (from 0.48 inches to 0.96 inches). Therefore, the value of the shape parameter, K, does not have a significant impact on the resulting 500-year water surface elevation.
Based on the information in the reference, the shape parameter, K, is estimated to be closer to -0.20 than -0.22. A 24-hour storm duration is used. The 500-year 24-hour rainfall amount for this facility is 8.71 inches. An SCS type II rainfall distribution is used.
Both the HEC-HMS model results from the sensitivity analysis for the shape parameter, K, are included in Appendix D. Both the HEC-RAS model results from the sensitivity analysis for the shape parameter, K, are included in Appendix F.
The rainfall amount for the Probable Maximum Precipitation (PMP) is calculated based on the procedure in Hydrometeorological Report No. 51, Probable Maximum Precipitation Estimates, WCS\\FINAL\\03047103047.05\\FLOOD PLAIN STUDY R051115_FLOOD PLAIN REPORT.DOC 3-1 APP A-12 REVISION 9 18 NOVEMBER 2005
United States East of the 1051h Meridian, Schreiner and Riedel, National Weather Service. A 72-hour storm duration is used. The rainfall is distributed based on the procedure outlined in Hydrometeorological Report No. 52, Application of Probable Maximum Precipitation Estimates -
United States East of the 1051h Meridian, Hansen, Schreiner and Miller, National Weather Service (HMR 52).
Two temporal sequences are modeled to determine which distribution produces the greatest runoff. One temporal sequence conforms to Figure 3 from HMR 52 and the other conforms to the example provided in the stepwise procedure Section 7.1.E, HMR 52.
The temporal sequence from Figure 3, HMR 52 provides the greatest runoff and the results from that model are included in this report.
The SCS dimensionless unit hydrograph method is used for this model. The method requires curve numbers to indicate the runoff potential of a hydrologic soil-cover complex and watershed lag to model watershed response.
The curve number is computed based on land use, cover type, hydrologic condition and soil group. A dry antecedent moisture condition (AMC I) is used to compute the curve number. The amount of precipitation occurring in the five days preceding the storm in question is an indication of the antecedent moisture condition of the soil. Texas Engineering Technical Note, Hydrology, No. 210-18-TX5, Estimating Runoff for Conservation Practices, Figure 1 shows the average condition runoff curve number in West Texas is AMC I. This publication also states that when an adjusted AMC results in a curve number less than 60 then a curve number of 60 will be selected as the minimally applicable number.
The curve number computed for Drainage Area 1A is 62. The curve number computed for Drainage Areas 1 B, 2, 3, 4, 5A, 58, 6 and 7 is 60.
The watershed lag is the time from the center of mass of excess rainfall to the time to peak for an SCS unit hydrograph.
Lag is empirically estimated as six-tenths (0.6) of the time of concentration.
The time of concentration is the time it takes for runoff to travel from the hydraulically most remote part of a watershed to a point of consideration.
In hydrograph analysis it represents the time from the end of excess rainfall to the point of inflection of an SCS unit hydrograph. Time of concentration is computed by determining the travel times for different segments of the flow path. The segments consist of sheet flow, shallow concentrated flow and WCS\\FINAL\\03047103047.05\\FLOOD PLAIN STUDY R051115_FLOOD PLAIN REPORT.DOC 3-2 APP A-13 REVISION 9 18 NOVEMBER 2005
concentrated flow. The sheet flow and shallow concentrated flow components are calculated using the equations from USDA SCS Technical Release 55, Urban Hydrology for Small Watersheds. Concentrated flow is calculated based on the flow velocity for the channel.
Channel velocities are calculated using Manning's Equation or they are estimated based on the results of the hydraulic model.
The lag time for drainage area 1A is eighty-six (86) minutes. The lag time for drainage area 1 B is forty-four (44) minutes. The lag time for drainage area 2 is sixty-five (65) minutes, but does not contribute to the runoff in the draw. The lag time for drainage area 3 is forty-four (44) minutes. The lag time for drainage area 4 is thirty-nine (39) minutes. The lag time for drainage area 5A is thirty-eight (38) minutes. The lag time for drainage area 58 is fifty-three (53) minutes.
The lag time for drainage area 6 is thirty (30) minutes. The lag time for drainage area 7 is sixty-four (64) minutes.
Hydrographs are routed through the stream reaches using the Lag model. The Lag model simply translates the hydrograph ordinates by a specified duration.
The travel times are estimated using the velocities from the results of the hydraulic model or by calculating the velocity using Manning's Equation. The lag for Reach 1 is thirty-five (35) minutes. The lag for Reach 1 A is seventeen (17) minutes. The lag for Reach 1 B is three (3) minutes. The lag for Reach 2 is fifteen (15) minutes. The lag for Reach 3 is seventeen (17) minutes. The lag for Reach 4 is twenty-one (21) minutes. The lag for Reach 5 is fourteen (14) minutes. The lag for Reach 6 is zero (0) minutes.
Storage, elevation, and outflow curves are developed for the playa/depression to determine the effect of the storage on the runoff from the area.
Calculations for the parameters used in the HEC-HMS model are included in the Drainage Calculations, Appendix A.
WCS\\FINAL\\03047103047.05\\FLOOD PLAIN STUDY R051115_FLOOD PLAIN REPORT.DOC 3-3 APP A-14 REVISION 9 18 NOVEMBER 2005
4.0 DESCRIPTION
OF HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS The water surface elevations are determined using the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Hydrologic Engineering Center's River Analysis System (HEC-RAS), version 3.0.1.
Cross sections for the model are taken from an Aerial Survey Map prepared by Cooper Aerial Surveys Co. This information is supplemented with ground elevations taken from a field survey by West Texas Consultants, Inc. This topographic information is then used to estimate the location of the 100-year, 500-year, and PMP water surfaces through the facility.
The starting station for the model is at the inlet to the culverts under State Highway 176 downstream of the facility. This is about 1700 feet downstream of the access road. Additional sections are located in this downstream reach to determine the sensitivity of the model to the downstream water surface elevation. Different starting water surface elevations are input to determine any impact on the 100-year water surface within the facility. The top of the Highway is greater than elevation 3405 based on information provided for the flow line elevation and the size of the existing culverts. The starting water surface elevations range from 3404.5 to 3407 msl. The water surface elevations within the facility are the same regardless of the starting water surface elevation. The elevation of the 100-year water surface at the RCRA permit line where the floodplain exits the facility (Section 2989) is 3414.32. The elevation of the 500-year water surface at the RCRA permit line is 3414.57. The elevation of the PMP water surface at the RCRA permit line is 3415.54.
The Manning's n value for the draw and overbanks is 0.033 based on an earth channel with minor irregularity and low vegetation. There is no difference in the material or vegetation for the draw or its overbanks. Photographs of six (6) - 29 inches by 18 inches corrugated metal pipe-arch culverts under the access road and a representative section of the draw are included as Figure 11.F.3.
Calculations for the parameters used in the HEC-RAS model are included in the Drainage Calculations, Appendix A.
WCSIFINAL\\03047.04\\DEC 2004 ANOD R041217_FLOODPLAIN RPT.DOC 4-1 APP A-15 REVISION 3 17 DECEMBER 2004
5.0
SUMMARY
OF RESULTS The 100-year peak discharges for each drainage area as determined by the HEC-HMS model are shown in Table 11.F.1.
The HEC-HMS model for the calculation of the 100-year peak discharges for each drainage area is included in Appendix B.
The 100-year peak discharge at the access road is about 790 cubic feet per second. The playa/depression contains all the runoff from drainage area 2.
The 100-year water surface elevations through the facility as determined by HEC-RAS are shown in Table 11.F.2. The HEC-RAS model for the calculation of the water surface profile is included in Appendix C.
The limits of the 100-year floodplain based on the topographic information provided and the location of the cross-sections are shown on Figure 11.F.4, Floodplain Map.
The 100-year peak discharge flows over the access road at the six (6) - 29 inches by 18 inches corrugated metal pipe-arch culverts. The maximum depth of flow over the road during the 100-year storm event is about one (1) foot.
The 100-year floodplain of the draw is generally characterized as shallow and wide.
The maximum depths of flow in the sections through the facility range from less than one half (0.5) of a foot to less than two (2) feet. The average maximum depth in the sections through the facility is about one ( 1) foot. The width of the floodplain ranges from about one hundred ( 100) feet to about seven hundred and fifty (750) feet. The average width of the floodplain through the facility is about three hundred and fifty (350) feet. The velocity of flow for the 100-year storm event within the draw through the facility is less than about four (4) feet per second.
The 500-year peak discharges for each drainage area as determined by the HEC-HMS model are shown in Table 11.F.3.
The HEC-HMS model for the calculation of the 500-year peak discharges for each drainage area is included in Appendix D.
The 500-year water surface elevations through the facility as determined by HEC-RAS are shown in Table 11.F.4. The HEC-RAS model for the calculation of the water surface profile is WCSIFINAL\\03047.04\\DEC 2004 ANOD R041217_FLOODPLAIN RPT.DOC 5-1 APP A-16 REVISION 3 17 DECEMBER 2004
included in Appendix F.
The limits of the 500-year floodplain based on the topographic information provided and the location of the cross-sections are shown on Figure 11.F.4, Floodplain Map.
The PMP peak discharges for each drainage area as determined by the HEC-HMS model are shown in Table 11.F.3. The HEC-HMS model for the calculation of the PMP peak discharges for each drainage area is included in Appendix E.
The PMP water surface elevations through the facility as determined by HEC-RAS are shown in Table 11.F.5. The HEC-RAS model for the calculation of the water surface profile is included in Appendix F. The limits of the PMP floodplain based on the topographic information provided and the location of the cross-sections are shown on Figure 11.F.4, Floodplain Map.
WCSIFINAL\\03047.04\\DEC 2004 ANOD R041217 _FLOODPLAIN RPT.DOC 5-2 APP A-17 REVISION 3 17 DECEMBER 2004
6.0 IMPACT OF DEVELOPMENT OF THE LOW LEVEL AND BYPRODUCT FACILITY ON THE FLOODPLAIN There is a temporary diversion ditch (Primary Ditch) north of the Low Level and Byproduct Facility. This ditch intercepts rainfall runoff from the north and directs it around the facility. As a result, a total of about 96 acres of the runoff from drainage areas 4 and 3 are diverted into drainage area 1. The impact of this diversion is modeled as described previously.
Runoff is modeled for the 100-year and 500-year storm events and the PMP using HEC-HMS.
These models are changed to reflect the presence of the diversion ditch. It is assumed that all the possible runoff from each storm event is captured and diverted by the ditch. This is a conservative assumption since the maximum amount of runoff diverted will produce the greatest difference in the floodplain (i.e. if the diversion ditch does not convey the runoff then the floodplain remains as calculated previously). Drainage areas, lag times, curve numbers, and routing through stream reaches are adjusted as necessary.
The Developed Low Level &
Byproduct Facility Drainage Area Map is included as Figure 11.F.5. Table 11.F.6 summarizes the 100-year peak discharge. Results of the 100-year HEC-HMS model for the Developed Low Level & Byproduct Facility are included in Appendix G.
Results of the 500-year HEC-HMS model for the Developed Low Level & Byproduct Facility are included in Appendix I. Results of the PMP HEC-HMS model for the Developed Low Level & Byproduct Facility are included in Appendix J. Table 11.F.8 summarizes the 500-year and PMP peak discharges.
Water surface profiles are modeled for the 100-year and 500-year storm events and the PMP using HEC-RAS. The flowrate for these models is changed to reflect the runoff calculated by the HEC-HMS models. Table 11.F.7 summarizes the 100-year water surface elevations. The results of the HEC-RAS model for 100-year storm with the Developed Low Level & Byproduct Facility in operation are included in Appendix H. The results of the HEC-RAS model for 500-year storm and PMP with the Developed Low Level & Byproduct Facility in operation are included in Appendix K. Table 11.F.9 summarizes the 500-year water surface elevations. Table 11.F.10 summarizes the PMP water surface elevations.
The water surface elevation increases by a maximum of less than one inch between sections 9690 and 8130 (about 1600 feet) for the 1 DO-year storm event. The remaining water surface WCS\\FINAL\\03047\\03047.05\\TECHNICAL NOD 21 TNOD 2 RESPONSES & DOCUMENTS\\FLOOD PLAIN\\
R060331_FLOODPLAIN RPT.DOC 6-1 APP A-18 REVISION 11 31 MARCH 2006
elevations are about the same for the 9700-foot long floodplain reach through the site. The water surface elevation increases by a maximum of less than one and one half inches between sections 9690 and 8130 (about 1600 feet) for the 500-year storm event. The remaining water surface elevations are about the same for the 9700-foot long floodplain reach through the site.
The water surface elevation increase ranges from five and four tenths and eight and one half inches between sections 9690 and 7717 (about 2000 feet) for the PMP. The remaining water surface elevations are about the same for the 9700-foot long floodplain reach through the site.
There are no structures in the vicinity of the floodplain that are affected by this minor increase in the water surface elevation that occurs over a small reach of the floodplain. Furthermore, the diversion ditch is temporary. It will direct water around the Low Level and Byproduct Facility during the operation of the facility. The diversion ditch will be filled in and the natural drainage patterns will be restored after the final grades are restored to the facility.
In conclusion, the impact of the diversion of runoff from the north around the Low Level and Byproduct Facility is insignificant in the magnitude of the increase in water surface elevation, limited in length of affected reach, and it is temporary.
WCS\\FINAL\\03047103047.05\\TECHNICAL NOD 2\\
TNOD 2 RESPONSES & DOCUMENTSIFLOOD PLAIN\\
R060331_FLOODPLAIN RPT.DOC 6-2 APP A-19 REVISION 11 31MARCH2006
7.0 IMPACT OF CHANGES IN ANTECEDENT MOISTURE CONDITION ON THE FLOODPLAIN The floodplain determined as discussed in Sections 1.0 through 5.0 of this report and depicted on Figure 11.F.4, Floodplain Map, is the current floodplain for the draw that crosses the southern portion of the facility. It is also the floodplain for the draw for the foreseeable future assuming there are no improvements to the floodplain. If there are some unforeseen climatic changes that occur in the distant future that also changes the climate of west Texas from semi-arid to tropical or wet, then the antecedent moisture condition of the soil will also change.
The antecedent moisture condition of the soil is indicated by the amount of precipitation occurring in the five days preceding the storm in question.
As discussed in Section 3, Description of Hydrologic Analysis, AMC I is the average condition runoff curve number in west Texas. Curve numbers based on AMC II and AMC Ill are modeled to determine the sensitivity of the floodplain to the Antecedent Moisture Condition of the soil. AMC I represents dry conditions, AMC II represents average moisture conditions, and AMC Ill represents a watershed that is practically saturated from antecedent rains.
The curve numbers for each drainage basin increase as the Antecedent Moisture Condition of the soil becomes wetter. As a result the runoff also increases. This increase in runoff becomes less significant as the magnitude of the storm increases.
As the magnitude of the storm increases, the percentage of the direct runoff from rainfall increases so the affect of the curve number decreases.
The increase in water surface elevation for the 100-year storm event from AMC I to AMC II is an average of 0.28 feet (about three inches). This increase ranges from 0.2 feet to 0.36 feet. The increase in water surface elevation for the 100-year storm event from AMC I to AMC Ill is an average of 0.45 feet (about five inches). This increase ranges from 0.35 feet to 0.55 feet. The increase in water surface elevation for the 500-year storm event from AMC I to AMC II is an average of 0.25 feet (about three inches). This increase ranges from 0.2 feet to 0.31 feet. The increase in water surface elevation for the 500-year storm event from AMC I to AMC 111 is an average of 0.39 feet (about five inches). This increase ranges from 0.30 feet to 0.47 feet. The increase in water surface elevation for the PMP from AMC I to AMC II is an average of 0.05 feet (less than one inch). This increase ranges from 0.0 feet to 0.08 feet. The increase in water WCS\\FINAL\\03047\\03047.05\\TECHNICAL NOD 2\\
TNOD 2 RESPONSES & DOCUMENTS\\FLOOD PLAIN\\
R060331_FLOODPLAIN RPT.DOC 7-1 APPA-20 REVISION 11 31 MARCH 2006
surface elevation for the PMP from AMC I to AMC Ill is an average of 0.08 feet (less than one inch). This increase ranges from 0.0 feet to 0.15 feet.
The increase in the water surface elevation resulting from an increase in the Antecedent Moisture Condition of the soil will not impact the facility. The maximum increases are for the 100-year water surface profile and that is only about one-half of a foot. The increase in the water surface elevation resulting for an increase in the Antecedent Moisture Condition of the soil for the most extreme storm, the PMP, is less than two inches at its maximum. The existing ground around the Low Level and Byproduct Facility is at a minimum about twenty feet above the elevation of the PMP water surface in the area. Based on the location of the facility with respect to the floodplain these minor increases in water surface elevation resulting from increased Antecedent Moisture Condition of the soil are insignificant and will not impact the facility.
The 100-year peak discharge for Antecedent Moisture Condition II is shown in Table 11.F.11.
The 100-year water surface elevations for Antecedent Moisture Condition II are shown in Table 11.F.12. The 500-year peak and PMP discharge for Antecedent Moisture Condition II is shown in Table 11.F.13. The 500-year water surface elevations for Antecedent Moisture Condition II are shown in Table 11.F.14. The PMP water surface elevations for Antecedent Moisture Condition II are shown in Table 11.F.15. The 100-year peak discharge for Antecedent Moisture Condition Ill is shown in Table 11.F.16.
The 100-year water surface elevations for Antecedent Moisture Condition Ill are shown in Table 11.F.17. The 500-year peak and PMP discharge for Antecedent Moisture Condition Ill is shown in Table 11.F.18.
The 500-year water surface elevations for Antecedent Moisture Condition Ill are shown in Table 11.F.19. The PMP water surface elevations for Antecedent Moisture Condition Ill are shown in Table 11.F.20.
The HEC-HMS model for the calculation of the 100-year peak discharges for Antecedent Moisture Condition II is included in Appendix L. The HEC-RAS model for the calculation of the 100-year water surface profile for Antecedent Moisture Condition II is included in Appendix M.
The HEC-HMS model for the calculation of the 500-year peak discharges for Antecedent Moisture Condition II is included in Appendix N. The HEC-HMS model for the calculation of the PMP peak discharges for Antecedent Moisture Condition II is included in Appendix 0. The WCS\\FINAL\\03047103047.05\\TECHNICAL NOD 21 TNOD 2 RESPONSES & DOCUMENTSIFLOOD PLAIN\\
R060331_FLOODPLAIN RPT.DOC 7-2 APP A-21 REVISION 11 31 MARCH 2006
HEC-RAS model for the calculation of the 500-year and PMP water surface profiles for Antecedent Moisture Condition II are included in Appendix P. The HEC-HMS model for the calculation of the 100-year peak discharges for Antecedent Moisture Condition 111 is included in Appendix Q. The HEC-RAS model for the calculation of the 100-year water surface profile for Antecedent Moisture Condition Ill is included in Appendix R. The HEC-HMS model for the calculation of the 500-year peak discharges for Antecedent Moisture Condition Ill is included in Appendix S.
The HEC-HMS model for the calculation of the PMP peak discharges for Antecedent Moisture Condition Ill is included in Appendix T. The HEC-RAS model for the calculation of the 500-year and PMP water surface profiles for Antecedent Moisture Condition 111 are included in Appendix U.
WCS\\FINAL\\03047\\03047.05\\TECHNICAL NOD 21 TNOD 2 RESPONSES & DOCUMENTSIFLOOD PLAIN\\
R060331_FLOODPLAIN RPT.DOC 7-3 APPA-22 REVISION 11 31MARCH2006
WCS\\FINAL\\03047.04\\DEC 2004 ANOD R041217_FLOODPLAIN RPT.DOC TABLES APPA-23 REVISION 3 17 DECEMBER 2004
Table 11.F.1 100-Year Peak Discharge Drainage Area/Junction WCS\\FINAL\\03047.04\\DEC 2004 ANOD T041217_TABLE 11.F.1.DOC Drainage Area 2 Playa/Depression Drainage Area 1A Junction 1A Junction 1 Junction 2 Junction 3 APPA-24 100 Year Flow rate (cfs) 440 0
257 325 364 687 790 REVISION 3 17 DECEMBER 2004
100 Year Flow rate Section (cfs) 12674 257 11337 257 10937 257 10288 257 9690 325 9009 325 8130 325 7717 325 7253 364 6343 687 5363 687 4221 790 3489 790 2989 790 WCS\\FINAL\\03047.04\\DEC 2004 ANODI T041217_TABLE 11.F.2.DOC Table 11.F.2 100-Year Water Surface Elevations 100 Year Maximum WSEL Depth (msl)
(ft) 3478.09 1.09 3470.06 1.06 3465.38 1.38 3456.67 0.67 3451.19 1.19 3446.12 1.12 3441.25 1.25 3438.44 0.64 3436.09 1.09 3430.46 0.46 3426.02 1.02 3420.71 0.71 3416.92 1.91 3414.32 0.52 APPA-25 Channel Velocity (fps) 1.71 3.96 3.45 3.57 2.13 3.57 1.84 3.64 1.28 3.65 1.41 4.01 1.66 3.36 Top Width (ft) 266.62 117.70 101.30 187.76 250.83 169.88 273.95 223.91 491.10 469.62 739.57 402.25 743.33 600.34 REVISION 3 17 DECEMBER 2004
Table 11.F.3 500-Year And PMP Peak Discharge Drainage Area/Junction Drainage Area 2 Playa/Depression Drainage Area 1A Junction 1A Junction 1 Junction 2 Junction 3 WCS\\FINAL\\03047.04\\DEC 2004 ANODI T041217_TABLE 11.F.3.DOC 500 Year Flow rate (cfs) 949 0
533 677 770 1496 1717 APPA-26 PMP Flow rate (cfs) 2726 2194 1768 2568 4793 6409 6969 REVISION 3 17 DECEMBER 2004
500 Year Flow rate Section (cfs) 12674 533 11337 533 10937 533 10288 533 9690 677 9009 677 8130 677 7717 677 7253 770 6343 1496 5363 1496 4221 1717 3489 1717 2989 1717 WCS\\FINAL\\03047.04\\DEC 2004 ANODI T041217_TABLE 11.F.4.DOC Table 11.F.4 500-Year Water Surface Elevations 500 Year Maximum WSEL Depth (msl)
(ft) 3478.39 1.39 3470.41 1.41 3465.80 1.80 3456.93 0.93 3451.55 1.55 3446.51 1.51 3441.63 1.63 3438.71 0.91 3436.41 1.41 3430.75 0.75 3426.40 1.40 3421.06 1.06 3417.25 2.25 3414.57 0.77 APPA-27 Channel Velocity (fps) 2.31 5.03 4.31 4.13 2.64 3.89 2.28 4.26 1.75 4.53 1.94 4.81 2.14 4.34 Top Width (ft) 306.92 132.24 130.37 250.47 325.16 252.56 355.10 284.67 523.18 524.36 851.92 517.17 1002.71 629.71 REVISION 3 17 DECEMBER 2004
PMP Flow rate Section (cfs) 12674 1768 11337 1768 10937 1768 10288 1768 9690 2568 9009 2568 8130 2568 7717 2568 7253 4793 6343 6409 5363 6409 4221 6969 3489 6969 2989 6969 WCS\\FINAL\\03047.04\\DEC 2004 ANODI T041217_TABLE 11.F.5.DOC Table 11.F.5 PMP-Year Water Surface Elevations PMP Maximum WSEL Depth (msl)
(ft) 3479.22 2.22 3471.40 2.40 3466.73 2.73 3457.50 1.50 3452.40 2.40 3447.55 2.55 3442.51 2.51 3439.61 1.81 3437.73 2.73 3431.79 1.79 3427.60 2.60 3422.09 2.09 3418.33 3.33 3415.54 1.74 APPA-28 Channel Velocity (fps) 3.61 7.37 6.57 5.03 4.32 4.66 3.85 5.19 4.15 6.69 3.49 6.36 3.59 6.56 Top Width (ft) 417.81 173.86 197.71 466.54 473.42 472.01 498.79 449.87 656.51 787.68 1207.27 1009.59 1076.90 879.23 REVISION 3 17 DECEMBER 2004
Table 11.F.6 Developed Low-Level and Byproduct Facility 100-Year Peak Discharge Drainage Area/Junction Drainage Area 2 Playa/Depression Drainage Area 1A Junction 1A Junction 1 Junction 2 Junction 3 W CS\\FINAL\\03047103047.05\\TECHNICAL NOD 21 TNOD2 RESPONSES & DOCUMENTS\\FLOOD PLAIN\\
T060331_100-YEAR DISCHARGE.DOC APPA-29 100 Year Flow rate (cfs) 440 0
257 385 406 679 770 REVISION 11 31 MARCH 2006
Table 11.F. 7 Developed Low-Level and Byproduct Facility 100-Year Water Surface Elevations 100 Year Flow rate Section (cfs) 12674 257 11337 257 10937 257 10288 257 9690 385 9009 385 8130 385 7717 385 7253 406 6343 679 5363 679 4221 770 3489 770 2989 770 W CS\\FINAL\\03047103047.05\\TECHNICAL NOD 21 TNOD2 RESPONSES & DOCUMENTS\\FLOOD PLAIN\\
T060331_100-YEAR ELEVATIONS.DOC 100 Year Maximum WSEL Depth (msl)
(ft) 3478.09 1.09 3470.06 1.06 3465.38 1.38 3456.67 0.67 3451.27 1.27 3446.20 1.20 3441.33 1.33 3438.49 0.69 3436.11 1.10 3430.47 0.46 3426.01 1.01 3420.70 0.70 3416.90 1.90 3414.31 0.51 APPA-30 Channel Velocity (fps) 1.71 3.96 3.45 3.57 2.23 3.65 1.93 3.79 1.39 3.60 1.41 3.99 1.64 3.33 Top Width (ft) 266.62 117.70 101.30 187.76 266.72 186.98 291.13 235.89 492.58 469.90 737.55 399.36 739.55 599.61 REVISION 11 31 MARCH 2006
Table 11.F.8 Developed Low-Level and Byproduct Facility 500-Year And PMP Peak Discharge 500 Year PMP Flow rate Flow rate Drainage Area/Junction Drainage Area 2 Playa/Depression Drainage Area 1A Junction 1A Junction 1 Junction 2 Junction 3 WCSIFINALI03047103047.051TECHNICAL NOD 21 TNOD2 RESPONSES & DOCUMENTSIFLOOD PLAIN T060331_500-YEAR DISCHARGE.DOC (cfs)
(cfs) 949 2726 0
2194 533 1768 828 4796 872 4942 1470 6399 1668 6955 APP A-31 REVISION 11 31 MARCH 2006
Table 11.F.9 Developed Low-Level and Byproduct Facility 500-Year Water Surface Elevations 500 Year Flow rate Section (cfs) 12674 533 11337 533 10937 533 10288 533 9690 828 9009 828 8130 828 7717 828 7253 872 6343 1470 5363 1470 4221 1668 3489 1668 2989 1668 W CSIFINALI03047103047.951TECHNICAL NOD 21 TNOD2 RESPONSES & DOCUMENTSIFLOOD PLAIN T060331_500-YEAR ELEVATIONS.DOC 500 Year Maximum WSEL Depth (msl)
(ft) 3478.39 1.39 3470.41 1.41 3465.80 1.80 3456.93 0.93 3451.67 1.67 3446.63 1.63 3441.76 1.76 3438.80 1.00 3436.44 1.44 3430.74 0.74 3426.38 1.38 3421.05 1.05 3417.23 2.23 3414.56 0.76 APPA-32 Channel Velocity (fps) 2.31 5.03 4.31 4.13 2.79 4.04 2.41 4.48 1.91 4.51 1.93 4.76 2.12 4.28 Top Width (ft) 306.92 132.24 130.37 250.47 349.80 277.44 382.07 304.12 526.19 522.87 847.50 511.16 1001.82 628.05 REVISION 11 31 MARCH 2006
Table 11.F.1 O Developed Low-Level and Byproduct Facility PMP - Water Surface Elevations PMP Flow rate Section (cfs) 12674 1768 11337 1768 10937 1768 10288 1768 9690 4796 9009 4796 8130 4796 7717 4796 7253 4942 6343 6399 5363 6399 4221 6955 3489 6955 2989 6955 WCS\\FINAL\\03047103047.05\\TECHNICAL NOD 21 TNOD2 RESPONSES & DOCUMENTS\\FLOOD PLAIN\\
T060331_PMP ELEVATIONS.DOC PMP Maximum WSEL Depth (msl)
(ft) 3479.22 2.22 3471.40 2.40 3466.73 2.73 3457.50 1.50 3453.03 3.03 3448.10 3.10 3443.22 3.22 3440.06 2.26 3437.75 2.75 3431.80 1.80 3427.59 2.59 3422.09 2.09 3418.33 3.33 3415.53 1.73 APPA-33 Channel Velocity (fps) 3.61 7.37 6.57 5.03 5.43 5.69 4.75 6.74 4.24 6.68 3.49 6.35 3.58 6.56 Top Width (ft) 417.81 173.86 197.71 466.54 560.63 579.12 590.61 521.44 658.36 788.09 1206.47 1009.43 1076.73 878.78 REVISION 11 31 MARCH 2006
Table 11.F.11 100-Year Peak Discharge Antecedent Moisture Condition II Drainage Area/Junction Drainage Area 2 Playa/Depression Drainage Area 1A WCS\\FINAL\\03047.05\\Technical NOD 21 TNOD2 Responses & Documents\\Flood Plain 0060331_AMll TABLE 11.F.11.DOC Junction 1A Junction 1 Junction 2 Junction 3 APPA-34 100 Year Flow rate (cfs) 744 0
257 611 697 1328 1500 REVISION 11 31 March 2006
100 Year Flow rate Section (cfs) 12674 488 11337 488 10937 488 10288 488 9690 611 9009 611 8130 611 7717 611 7253 697 6343 1328 5363 1328 4221 1501 3489 1501 2989 1501 WCS\\FINAL\\03047.05\\Technical NOD 21 TNOD2 Responses & Documents\\Flood Plain 0060331_AMll TABLE 11.F.12.DOC Table 11.F.12 100-Year Water Surface Elevations Antecedent Moisture Condition II 100 Year Maximum WSEL Depth (msl)
(ft) 3478.35 1.35 3470.36 1.36 3465.74 1.74 3456.90 0.90 3451.49 1.49 3446.45 1.45 3441.57 1.57 3438.66 0.86 3436.35 1.35 3430.70 0.70 3426.33 1.33 3420.99 0.99 3417.18 2.18 3414.52 0.72 APPA-35 Channel Velocity (fps) 2.23 4.87 4.21 4.04 2.56 3.84 2.21 4.18 1.69 4.37 1.85 4.67 2.05 4.14 Top Width (ft) 301.04 130.23 126.27 242.43 313.59 239.94 342.53 274.48 517.58 514.6 830.57 483.60 998.9 623.28 REVISION 11 31 March 2006
Table 11.F.13 500-Year And PMP Peak Discharge Antecedent Moisture Condition II 500 Year Flow rate Drainage Area/Junction (cfs)
Drainage Area 2 Playa/Depression Drainage Area 1A Junction 1A Junction 1 Junction 2 Junction 3 WCS\\FINAL\\03047.05\\Technical NOD 21 TNOD2 Responses & Documents\\Flood Plain 0060331_AMll TABLE 11.F.13.DOC 1343 0
818 1032 1201 2315 2625 APPA-36 PMP Flow rate (cfs) 2805 2380 1833 2662 5170 6871 7467 REVISION 11 31 March 2006
500 Year Flow rate Section (cfs) 12674 818 11337 818 10937 818 10288 818 9690 1032 9009 1032 8130 1032 7717 1032 7253 1201 6343 2315 5363 2315 4221 2625 3489 2625 2989 2625 WCS\\FINAL\\03047.05\\Technical NOD 21 TNOD2 Responses & Documents\\Flood Plain 0060331_AMll TABLE 11.F.14.DOC Table 11.F.14 500-Year Water Surface Elevations Antecedent Moisture Condition II 500 Year Maximum WSEL Depth (msl)
(ft) 3478.64 1.64 3470.67 1.67 3466.11 2.11 3457.15 1.15 3451.81 1.81 3446.77 1.77 3441.91 1.91 3438.91 1.11 3436.66 1.66 3430.98 0.98 3426.68 1.68 3421.33 1.33 3417.51 2.51 3414.77 0.97 APPA-37 Channel Velocity (fps) 2.70 5.89 4.88 4.08 2.97 4.19 2.56 4.70 2.11 5.08 2.32 5.21 2.45 5.02 Top Width (ft) 340.14 143.25 152.46 402.08 378.22 307.32 413.44 328.51 548.75 568.22 934.95 648.13 1016.94 651.07 REVISION 11 31 March 2006
Table 11.F.15 PMP-Year Water Surface Elevations PMP Flow rate Section (cfs) 12674 1833 11337 1833 10937 1833 10288 1833 9690 2662 9009 2662 8130 2662 7717 2662 7253 5170 6343 6871 5363 6871 4221 7467 3489 7467 2989 7467 WCS\\FINAL\\03047.05\\Technical NOD 21 TNOD2 Responses & Documents\\Flood Plain 0060331_AMll TABLE 11.F.15.DOC Antecedent Moisture Condition II PMP Maximum WSEL Depth (msl)
(ft) 3479.26 2.26 3471.45 2.45 3466.73 2.73 3457.54 1.54 3452.41 2.41 3447.61 2.61 3442.51 2.51 3439.69 1.89 3437.80 2.80 3431.88 1.88 3427.67 2.67 3422.16 2.16 3418.39 3.39 3415.64 1.84 APPA-38 Channel Velocity (fps) 3.66 7.43 6.81 4.94 4.45 4.59 3.98 5.00 4.32 6.95 3.60 6.45 3.72 6.54 Top Width (ft) 421.93 175.84 197.77 474.18 474.74 485.14 499.24 463.57 663.98 836.71 1229.57 1031.21 1083.03 894.76 REVISION 11 31 March 2006
Table 11.F.16 100-Year Peak Discharge Antecedent Moisture Condition Ill Drainage Area/Junction Drainage Area 2 Playa/Depression Drainage Area 1A WCS\\FINAL\\03047.05\\Technical NOD 21 TNOD2 Responses & Documents\\Flood Plain 0060331_AMlll TABLE 11.F.16.DOC Junction 1A Junction 1 Junction 2 Junction 3 APPA-39 100 Year Flow rate (cfs) 1108 0
645 817 966 1873 2128 REVISION 11 31 March 2006
100 Year Flow rate Section (cfs) 12674 645 11337 645 10937 645 10288 645 9690 817 9009 817 8130 817 7717 817 7253 966 6343 1873 5363 1873 4221 2128 3489 2128 2989 2128 WCS\\FINAL\\03047.05\\Technical NOD 21 TNOD2 Responses & Documents\\Flood Plain 0060331_AMlll TABLE 11.F.17.DOC Table 11.F.17 100-Year Water Surface Elevations Antecedent Moisture Condition Ill 100 Year Maximum WSEL Depth (msl)
(ft) 3478.49 1.49 3470.53 1.53 3465.93 1.93 3457.07 1.07 3451.66 1.66 3446.62 1.62 3441.75 1.75 3438.79 0.99 3436.53 1.53 3430.86 0.86 3426.53 1.53 3421.19 1.19 3417.37 2.37 3414.67 0.87 APPA-40 Channel Velocity (fps) 2.49 5.36 4.57 3.87 2.78 4.03 2.40 4.47 1.92 4.82 2.13 5.0 2.30 4.64 Top Width (ft) 320.33 137.13 139.30 349.93 348.04 275.79 380.21 302.82 535.68 545.10 892.02 581.33 1009.36 640.02 REVISION 11 31 March 2006
Table 11.F.18 500-Year And PMP Peak Discharge Antecedent Moisture Condition Ill 500 Year Flow rate Drainage Area/Junction (cfs)
Drainage Area 2 Playa/Depression Drainage Area 1A Junction 1A Junction 1 Junction 2 Junction 3 WCS\\FINAL\\03047.05\\Technical NOD 21 TNOD2 Responses & Documents\\Flood Plain 0060331_AMlll TABLE 11.F.1 8.DOC 1741 0
976 1242 1483 2888 3286 APP A-41 PMP Flow rate (cfs) 2847 2519 1850 2689 5399 7144 7766 REVISION 11 31 March 2006
500 Year Flow rate Section (cfs) 12674 976 11337 976 10937 976 10288 976 9690 1242 9009 1242 8130 1242 7717 1242 7253 1483 6343 2888 5363 2888 4221 3286 3489 3286 2989 3286 WCS\\FINAL\\03047.05\\Technical NOD 21 TNOD2 Responses & Documents\\Flood Plain 0060331_AMlll TABLE 11.F.19.DOC Table 11.F.19 500-Year Water Surface Elevations Antecedent Moisture Condition Ill 500 Year Maximum WSEL Depth (msl)
(ft) 3478.76 1.75 3470.81 1.81 3466.24 2.24 3457.22 1.22 3451.93 1.93 3446.90 1.90 3442.03 2.03 3439.01 1.21 3436.81 1.81 3431.11 1.11 3426.84 1.84 3421.49 1.49 3417.66 2.66 3414.95 1.15 APPA-42 Channel Velocity (fps) 2.90 6.21 5.21 4.31 3.13 4.31 2.73 4.88 2.29 5.44 2.54 5.39 2.66 5.40 Top Width (ft) 355.40 149.13 162.01 413.97 404.17 334.67 437.11 350.81 563.87 583.36 934.24 728.53 1025.44 788.45 REVISION 11 31 March 2006
Table 11.F.20 PMP-Year Water Surface Elevations PMP Flow rate Section (cfs) 12674 1850 11337 1850 10937 1850 10288 1850 9690 2689 9009 2689 8130 2689 7717 2689 7253 5399 6343 7144 5363 7144 4221 7766 3489 7766 2989 7766 WCS\\FINAL\\03047.05\\Technical NOD 21 TNOD2 Responses & Documents\\Flood Plain 0060331_AMlll TABLE 11.F.20.DOC Antecedent Moisture Condition Ill PMP Maximum WSEL Depth (msl)
(ft) 3479.26 2.26 3471.47 2.47 3466.72 2.72 3457.57 1.57 3452.40 2.40 3447.65 2.65 3442.50 2.50 3439.74 1.94 3437.84 2.84 3431.94 1.94 3427.72 2.72 3422.20 2.20 3418.44 3.44 3415.68 1.88 APPA-43 Channel Velocity (fps) 3.69 7.39 6.91 4.82 4.52 4.51 4.06 4.84 4.42 6.76 3.65 6.51 3.78 6.62 Top Width (ft) 422.29 176.84 197.22 479.25 473.62 492.15 497.59 471.42 667.97 867.12 1242.81 1043.46 1087.51 900.85 REVISION 11 31 March 2006
WCS\\FINAL\\03047.04\\DEC 2004 ANOD R041217 _FLOODPLAIN RPT.DOC FIGURES APPA-44 REVISION 3 17 DECEMBER 2004
/
I '
! ~
I
)
~/
/
/
/
)
/
I
(._,7_.,
l
~' " c,
/
~,....
r,11,
/
-~-- - - 1 j,/... f EXISTING PERMIT
/ - '
,** - - \\
- *-.£ QttND'AR Y*
- 27" ~igb Arch 8MP FL :o u T *,)402.3
]
?,,~'::'
'.,\\J:fj.1/,
(/ -~-
/
/
I
(
I *
/
I,,
(
~ ;,/
/
/
/
/
_/ '.
(
I
/
\\
- f
. ),',,.-'
I,--,
f l
I
' - ', {
\\,
L I
/
' /
, I I I'/
- '
- ._/
,//
J
/...
/
APPA-45 L
(
(
\\
\\
_/,..'
/
..---'/
/
/
\\,_ l..._
\\ ',
/
/
/ '
/
LEGEND 0
PLAYA AREA BOUNDARY DRAINAGE AREA BOUNDARY AERIAL TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY BY SURVEY CO.
LIMITS OF COOPER EXISTING PERMIT BOUNDARY REACH LENGTH TRAVEL TIME FLOW PATH JUNCTION NOTES:
1.
- 2.
Existing sizes taken from field observation. Pipe fl owl in es pipe Survey by West Texas (915) 523-2181, Fax:
topographic Inc.,
Consultants, (915) 524-2346, 305 taken TX NW Ave. C, Andrews, dated 10/07 /96.
Existing in form a ti on the limits by Cooper Aerial Survey
- 85020, with in Co.,
AZ Creek Road, Phoenix, 678-5228, 1-800-229-2279.
provided 11402 N.
(602)
Cave Fax:
IS shown (602) 678-5111 from
- 79714,
- 3. Existing topographic information outside the limits shown is based on a digital elevation model (DEM) provided by The Texas Natural Resources Information System (TNRIS).
- 4. Permit boundary and Specialists LLC.
facility information provided by Waste Control Drainage Area* Map SCALE* 1' - 1000'
§§ I
iE 11.F.1
,)
_//
f,/"
)
. / /
/
/
/
-, /" " * * -~ - _,., --
- - _/_,....:-,:. ---
-- ~-
- )/
I * ;'1,-* <
/
' /
/
i
! J--i~f{s ;qt topogro'Phy
/- / _ 'CoaPei ~A*e-ri9I Survey
..'.~~ --. _,Sie/~O{~;:'z **
~yiVey Co. :....
- l.,/'
.. ) *.
I I
\\ '
_, i
.. /
/
/
,/ /
\\ \\
I
\\ '
,J EXISTING PERMIT
-130tJNuARY Drainage Ahia
... '47.41 k i..
,.,. 1
- i. _./
. I
,.,,_. \\.
,/,.. -. -..
I
'* l
<: I i" *--
I:.__
-i. * '*'
/ "*--*
/
' /
',_ \\ _ \\
/
/
- .1. '
~..
I.
b~
- ~
',.,.* ~, (
1;.
I ' I
' i !
1 ~*- --
. I.
l_
/
)
~. ;
- /
I:
, I
/
\\. --\\.
,~--
! )
(
)
/
(
f
/
- 1
/
/
RA]3
/I
/
/"
I' \\ '
/
- ' /
,. /'-..-~-":'~-.
j
\\~..... ~, :\\\\ )~2;;\\;* \\;
/
/
-=-*
- - RAB
~~'~ -~\\) --.,
/'~
' I
'-- 1*",....... \\.
~
\\..
i l ~
\\ *-
I
/
)
/
/
' \\
\\
') '.
r' --;,
I
--*://
/
/ '
/..
.. /
-, '
- 1,_ --.
i i
,,.~ -
,-- / '
,//
r
/
)
,.. ~
/
/
/
\\
~
'1 i
\\
\\ ' '
\\. : ',
\\
. \\ 1 '
\\
1" ' I '.
APPA-46
/ l
/
/
/
I )
--('
' ' J L.
l.,
I I
/
r---. -
/-------
(
c ----.
- - ~-- ~- --
I l
' -'::~, '
J (._-.-- ~--
'* J
(..,
- /
.j
_,/'
/
---~--.!
,/.
/
( '\\ '
. \\
'-, '-- *, ' _\\-....
/
LEGEND SYM BOL JPC TWB BCB RAB FOB lmb KMB NOTES:
SOIL BOUNDARY HYDROLOGIC CONDITION DRAINAGE AREA BOUNDARY LIMITS OF TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY EXISTING GROUP A
B B
B B
B c PERMIT BOUNDARY NAME Jalmar Triomas Blakeney Ratliff Faskin Ima Kimbrough BY COOPER AERIAL SURVEY CO.
1. Soil information taken Soil August information within from the Conservation Service Soil Survey of
- 2.
- 3.
- 4.
- 5.
Andrews Existing County, Texas topographic by issued 1974.
the limits provided 11402 N.
Cooper Cave Creek Aerial Survey Co.,
Road, Phoenix, AZ 85020, Fax: (602) 678-5228, 1-800-229-2279.
Existing topographic information shown.
IS (602) 678-5111, IS based on a digital elevation Information model (DEM)
(TNRIS).
outside provided the limits The shown Natural Texas by Resources Hydrologic Hydrologic System condition north south of of Permit condition boundary information line the the line provided IS IS by considered poor.
considered fair.
Waste Control Specialists LLC.
Soil Map SCALE* r - 1000'
/
g
~
~
~
~
fQ'.02
~
~
~
~
g
~
@:J
~
~
<9
~
~
~
<9 g
~
~
fQ'.02
~
~
0 0 '.!:
('J ('J u.
00
@])
~
~
©
~
- 0.
~
~
~
§)
© g
@])
~
© t:=:J L=eJ
~
~
(/) 0.
0 "'
~~
0
(/)
11.F.2 I
I I
~
I C l"f IE I) I..)/\\',/.;
. I \\ '*' '*'
D APP A-47 ll<
I. Siii ;
.>.Ji O'""lt.
nrr.OEllCK H. i AAS P.£.
CCN LT \\
- f"(;~ f:Jl
~13.'t " ~.11 '1 CHO
,-v.s1:.. 1*-u s 1~1~,
~112-4 lR-65 2/09/ 04 o.> -f/ ~1 1 Hf- ~... 14.\\
NOTES:
- 1. Existing pipe sizes token from field observation. Pipe flowlines token from Survey by West Texas Consultants, Inc., 305 NW Ave. C, Andrews, TX 79714, (91 ~)) 523-2181, Fox: (915) 524-2346, dated 10/07 /06.
- 2. Existing topographic information within the limits shown is provided by Cooper Aerial Survey Co.,
11402 N. Cave Creek Road, Phoenix, AZ 85020, (602) 678-5111 Fax: (602) 678-5228, 1-800-229-2279.
- 3. Existing topographic information outside the limits shown is based on a digital elevation model (DEM) provided by The Texas Natural Resources lnfo1-mation System (TNRIS).
- 4. Facility boundary and Land Disposal Facility information provided by Waste Control Special is ts LLC.
~-r---~-~
Limits of topo raphy survey b Cooper Aerial Su rvey Co. -
See N ote<+.--~
l __ _,,
3400--~
3404--+-.
FL IN 3410
" Wide x 27LJ:Jjgh Arch CM I..
I '<JJ
- ' \\
- ~
.7, FL OUT /3402.3 lXJ 0
'1" n
L I
I
+ 1
~:b 0
/,:
LEGEND 34+89----
PROBABLE MAXIMUM PRECIPITATION FLOODPLAIN LIMITS 500 YEAR FLOODPLAIN LIMITS 100 YEAR FLOODPLAIN LIMITS LIMITS OF TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY BY COOPER AERIAL SURVEY CO.
FACILITY CHANNEL CENTER LINE CHANNEL CROSS-SECTION LOCATION 1 6+74
\\
FLOODPLAIN MAP SCALE* r - 400' Q
d d
~
I@
&==::I
§§ d
~
~
@)
~
&==::I g
°'
[@
~
~ ~
§]
~
d
© g
© I@
~
~
~
@)
~
B::i g
~
§]
Q
~
~
~
~
~
11.F.4
/
/
/
(
/
./
j
/
,/
/
f' J
/
/
i..
L,
/*
~~. \\ i
'; ' \\
c,...._
--~ ~ '-
~.~
EXISTING PERIVl'IT 130ttND'ARY'
/
/
'/
/
)
/
,/
/'
I
/
I
/
)
/
\\ ' '
'* L L.
i
/
' \\
/
JI,I
,I l _,
)...
I. '
/
(
/
\\,
/
.' - ~
'\\ --
\\ '- \\\\
/
/
I i
.)
\\_ "' I
/
~ __,,-
' __,_ i,_ -
- ~:.
/
/,
J l_."
(
/
i '
- ' (\\'
I "
\\/~*
L.
APPA-49
/
' < I
,1.'"'
1
,.~*- /
L
\\.
/
/
I
,' /
I
/
/
ii I
~\\,'r\\
- ,/
, "-~I
( /
\\
' I
~-**
1ii1:;11"i;.:" -. _
- .:1- -,.
'c /
I
/
I 1 '.
/
/*
i
\\
I
} " ' /
/*
/
)
/
j
/
NOTES:
LEGEND 0
PLAYA AREA BOUNDARY DRAINAGE AREA BOUNDARY OF TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY BY AERIAL SURVEY CO.
LIMITS COOPER EXISTING PERMIT BOUNDARY REACH LENGTH TRAVEL TIME FLOW PATH JUNCTION
- 1. Existing pipe sizes taken from field observation. Pipe flowlines taken from Survey by West Texas Consultants, Inc., 305 NW Ave. C, Andrews, TX 79714, (915) 523-2181, Fax: (915) 524-2346, dated 10/07 /96.
- 2.
- 3.
- 4.
information with in limits shown.
IS Existing the topographic by Cooper Aerial Survey Co.,
Cave Creek Road, Phoenix, 678-5228, 1-800-229-2279.
provided 11402 N.
(602)
- 85020, AZ (602) 678-5111 Fax:
Existing digital topographic information limits shown Texas outside the provided by The IS model (DEM)
(TNRIS).
elevation System Information Natural based on a Resources Permit boundary and facility information Specialists LLC.
provided by Waste Control Developed Low Level &
Byproduct Faclllty Drainage Area Map SCALE* 1' - 1000' 00 88 Q) Q)
~o w@
z z y:
3 (') 0 w
<( Cl) w l-a: w I
<(
0000 (j) 0...
0
<(
32
~
<(
z
<(
a:
0 11.F.5
l
/
/ -
/
/
/
- ~
J
/
/
i r *
/
i' 1
- 1.
l (.---~-- -
' :, ~~,.- -*L -
/
/
>>l;N*
~ "'
I
'- ~
, Ll~ its Of topograpny,_?uf:vey ~ N' -. L
_µ CofllPei:, Ae[f"tl Survey cb. '-1 J~
- _s8~--Note/~~
- l.
/
1/
, /
EXISTING PERMff
.. BOUNDARY.,
"\\
- I
/
- 1 g'rolnage ~
6 -.
47.41 h;'
. I "
I I,
I I~ ! /
'. I
'-*.,J 1,,
- 1 L
/
(,
/.
/
' L
\\
--*~
/
(
)~ _,
/
' I.
/
/
,,../
/
/
I I
I I
\\ I
.J I
)
l
/
l
- - - f sds
\\
/
/
' i,
/'
' /
(
" i
' I.
. I RAB
")
1
/
'~ -,
" ( "
/
I l I I I
- 1*
I
-or'cilriage I~
52;s -lie* I.;.
i ' '*
/
/
I
' )
\\
I I
/
/
I,
/' ' ' '
r i i.
i::?
/
/
'-*1'
~,
l-(
(
/
BOUNDARY.
s6s
/ ~
- >\\~
(
/
I APPA-50
- ,, I
\\ '
\\ \\'
"\\.
/
i*
/
/
(
/
/
/
c, :_:
J /
/
) '.
/
/
/
" '" I * ".
/
/
/'.
(,
/
\\ '..
fl
~ -
"~
(
' V/
/
'f
/
)
- )
LEGEND SOIL BOUNDARY HYDROLOGIC CONDITION DRAINAGE AREA BOUNDARY SYMBOL JPC TWB BCB RAB FDB lmb KMB LIMITS OF TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY BY COOPER AERIAL SURVEY EXISTING GROUP A
B B
B B
B c
PERMIT BOUNDARY NAME Jolmar Triomas Blakeney Ratliff Fas kin Imo Kimbrough CO.
NOTES:
1.
- 2.
- 3.
- 4.
- 5.
Soil information taken Soil Texas issued August information within from Conservation the Service Soil Survey of Andrews Existing
- County, topographic 1974.
the limits shown 1s provided 11402 N.
Aerial Survey Co.,
by Cooper Cave Creek Road, Phoenix, AZ 85020, (602) 678-5111, Fax: (602) 678-5228, 1-800-229-2279.
Existing topographic information outside the limits The Texas shown Natural IS based on a Resources digital elevation Information model (DEM)
System (TNRIS).
condition north of condition south of Hydrologic Hydrologic Permit boundary information provided the line the line provided by IS IS by considered poor.
considered fair.
Waste Control Specialists LLC.
Developed Low Level &
Byproduct Faclllty Solls Map SCALE* r - 1000' OOI CJ CJ I 0 0 LL 11.F.6